Safety Management System Manual SR Technics Switzerland Ltd. · 2017. 11. 17. · SR Technics...

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S

MANUAL PROPRIETARY NOTICE

THIS DOCUMENT AND THE INFORMATION DISCLOSED HEREIN ARE PROPRIETARY DATA OF SR TECHNICS

NEITHER THIS DOCUMENT NOR THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN SHALL BE REPRODUCED, USED, OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE WRITTEN

AUTHORISATION OF SR TECHNICS

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S

Policy Doc.-No. G-046-001-POL

Owner OQ Issue No. 08 Valid from 26 July 2016

SR Technics

Safety Management System Manual

A Table of Contents A Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................................... 2

B Record of Revision .................................................................................................................................. 3

C List of Effective Pages............................................................................................................................. 4

D Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................................... 5

E Definitions ................................................................................................................................................. 6 F Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 8

F1 Purpose .............................................................................................................................................. 8 F2 Regulatory requirements .................................................................................................................. 8

1 Safety Objectives and Policy ................................................................................................................ 9 1.1 Management commitment and responsibility ............................................................................. 9 1.2 Safety accountabilities and responsibilities .............................................................................. 10 1.3 Appointment of key safety personnel ........................................................................................ 15 1.4 Coordination of emergency response planning ........................................................................ 16 1.5 SMS Documentation ..................................................................................................................... 17

2 Safety Risk Management ..................................................................................................................... 18 2.1 Hazard Identification .................................................................................................................... 18 2.2 Risk assessment and mitigation ................................................................................................. 21

3 Safety Assurance ................................................................................................................................. 27 3.1 Safety performance monitoring and measurement .................................................................. 27 3.2 The management of change ........................................................................................................ 30 3.3 Continuous improvement of the SMS ........................................................................................ 31

4 Safety Promotion .................................................................................................................................. 32 4.1 Training and education ................................................................................................................ 32 4.2 Safety Communication ................................................................................................................. 33

X Appendix ................................................................................................................................................. 38 X1 38 X2 39 X3 39 X4 40

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

B Record of Revision Keep the manual up-to –date by inserting revisions immediately Issue No. Issue Date Issued by

00, Initial issue 5 April 2011 Robert Spence

01 15 November 2011 Stephan Tschannen

02 2 February 2012 Beat Kistler

03 08 November 2012 Beat Kistler

04 04 March 2013 Beat Kistler

05 13 September 2013 Beat Kistler

06 08 April 2015 Beat Kistler

07 16 May 2016 Oscar Piterà

08 26 July 2016 Oscar Piterà

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

C List of Effective Pages Page Issue Number Page Issue Number

1 08 32 08

2 08 33 08

3 08 34 08

4 08 35 08

5 08 36 08

6 08 37 08

7 08 38 08

8 08 39 08

9 08 40 08

10 08

11 08

12 08

13 08

14 08

15 08

16 08

17 08

18 08

19 08

20 08

21 08

22 08

23 08

24 08

25 08

26 08

27 08

28 08

29 08

30 08

31 08

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

D Abbreviations AOC Airline Operators Committee

AOPA Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association Switzerland

ASC Airport Safety Committee

ATEC Aviation Technician Education Council

BU Business Unit

CAMO Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation

CMH Crisis Management Handbook

EASA European Aviation Safety Agency

ERM Enterprise Risk Management

FTE Full time employee

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

INC Incident, result of an Risk Assessed and Classified OHR

LT Leadership Team

MOE Maintenance Organisation Exposition

OHR Occurrence & Hazard Report

OQ Quality, Safety and Central Engineering

OQP Processes, Methods and Tools

OR Occurrence Report

OSHE Occupational Safety, Security, Health & Environment

QM Quality Manager

SMS Safety Management System

WBT Web Based Training

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

E Definitions Accident An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft that takes place

between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight and all such persons have disembarked, and in which any person suffers death or serious injury, or in which the aircraft receives substantial damage (ref. FAA AC 120-92A, ICAO Annex 13).

Cost of Poor Quality

Reference to Annex X4

Customer Complaint

Expression of dissatisfaction with a product or service expressed by a customer and received by an organization and recorded as OHR. Whenever a customer lodges a complaint, a response is either explicitly or implicitly required.

Defence A Defence (or safety requirement) is an intervention that is put in place by the business to protect us from the undesired outcome that the Hazard presents

EOR

Is an external occurrence report which has been caused external or reported external, e.g. customer complaint.

Error Non-intentional action or inaction by a person that may lead to deviations from accepted procedures or regulations. Errors are often associated with occasions where a planned sequence of mental or physical activities either fails to achieve its intended outcome, or is not appropriate with regard to the intended outcome, and when results cannot be attributed to the intervention of some chance agency. The mechanic forgetting to tighten the pipe was an error (ref. EASA RMT.0251).

Hazard Any existing or potential condition that can lead to injury, illness, or death; damage to or loss of a system, equipment, or property; or damage to the environment (environmental issues are not within the scope of the SMS). A hazard is a condition that might cause (is a prerequisite to) an accident or incident (ref. FAA AC 120-92A)

Incident An occurrence other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft, which affects or could affect the safety of operations (ref. FAA AC 120-92A, ICAO Annex 13)

IOR Is an internal occurrence report which has been triggered by an SRT employee.

Just Culture Is defined as an atmosphere of trust in which people are encouraged (even rewarded) for providing essential safety-related information, but in which they are also clear about where the line must be drawn between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour (ref. Reason 1997)

Near-Miss An occurrence which under slightly different circumstances could have led to an aircraft incident or accident. An example is when a mechanic on rechecking his/her work at the end of a task realises that a pipe was only connected hand tight (ref. EASA RMT.0251).

MOR Is a mandatory occurrence report which has to be submitted to the competent authority within 72 hours.

MOR Operator Is a mandatory occurrence report which has been reported to the authority by an external party e.g. customer.

Risk Risk is the combination of the Likelihood of the Hazard being released and it’s Impact (or harming potential) on individuals and/or the business

Safety Culture

Is defined as the product of individual and group values, attitudes, competencies, and patterns of behavior that determine the commitment to, and the style and proficiency of, the organization’s management of safety. Organizations with a positive safety culture are characterized by

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

communications founded on mutual trust, by shared perceptions of the importance of safety and by confidence in the efficacy of preventive measures (ref. FAA AC 120-92A)

Safety Management System

An SMS is defined as a systematic approach to managing safety, including the necessary organizational structures, accountabilities, policies and procedures (ref. ICAO Doc 9859 AN/474)

Safety Risk Management

Is defined as a formal process within the SMS that describes the system, identifies the hazards, assesses the risk, analyzes the risk, and controls the risk. The SRM process is embedded in the processes used to provide the product/service; it is not a separate/distinct process. SRM expectations are provided in the FAA SMS Framework, Component 2.0 (ref. FAA AC 120-92A)

Threat A Threat, (or sometimes called a trigger or top event) is a latent or active failure that breaks down the defense to release the harming potential of the Hazard

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

F Introduction F1 Purpose The purpose of this manual is to assist all the people who work at, with, on behalf of or visit SR Technics Group in fulfilling its obligations to the management of safety through SR Technics Safety Management System. Whilst every employee at SR Technics is responsible for safety and safe practices, this manual is aimed at the people who are accountable and responsible for developing, implementing and managing effective safety systems. These include:

• The Leadership Team (LT)

• Safety & Risk Officer

• Quality Managers (QMs), Investigators and Risk Assessors

Specific responsibilities for implementing the policies and procedures specified in this manual are defined in section 1.1 and 1.2.

F2 Regulatory requirements The Safety Management System of SR Technics is based on the ICAO SMS Framework. This framework defines four pillars which are necessary for a Safety Culture: Safety policy and objectives, safety risk management, safety assurance and safety promotion (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: ICAO SMS Framework This SMS Manual is structured according to the ICAO SMS Framework. Since 2009 the ICAO has published several annexes for SMS implementation: SMS Implementation Annex 1, SMS Implementation Annex 2, SMS Implementation Annex 3 and SMS Implementation Annex 4.Those annexes form the legal background of SMS.

ICAO SMS Framework

1 Safety policy and objectives

● 1.1 – Management commitment and responsibility

● 1.2 – Safety accountabilities

● 1.3 – Appointment of key safety personnel

● 1.4 – Coordination of emergency response planning

● 1.5 – SMS Documentation

2 Safety risk management

● 2.1 – Hazard identification

● 2.2 – Risk assessment and mitigation

3 Safety assurance ● 3.1 – Safety

performance monitoring and measurement

● 3.2 – The management of change

● 3.3 – Continuous improvement of the SMS

4 Safety promotion ● 4.1 – Training and

education

● 4.2 – Safety communication

Safety Culture

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1 Safety Objectives and Policy

1.1 Management commitment and responsibility 1.1.1 Safety and Quality Policy The Safety and Quality policy of SR Technics Switzerland Ltd. and SR Technics Group is an integral part of our Maintenance Organisation Exposition (MOE). It is included in chapter 1.2 of the approved and published MOE, which can be accessed via the Our Documentation section in the SR Technics intranet. The below is a copy thereof and valid at time of issuance of this manual. It is included here for informational purposes only. If a newer version is available in the MOE than the one shown below, then the former takes precedence at all times.

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.2 Safety accountabilities and responsibilities 1.2.1 Form 4 Holder Meeting The Form 4 Holder Meeting is chaired and organized by the Vice President Group Quality, Safety and Central Engineering (hereafter called VP OQ). The participants are listed below. It takes place on a quarterly basis. The Form 4 Holder Meeting has the authority to make decisions regarding the setup and administration of the quality & safety management system including policies and the governance at SR Technics Operation.

The main tasks of the Form 4 Holder Meeting are: a) Discuss and accept the Group Quarterly Quality & Safety Report b) Review the effectiveness of quality and safety management system (including the Safety &

Quality Policy) and decide on corrective and improvement actions c) Monitor that any necessary corrective action is taken in a timely manner and verify the

effectiveness of those d) Monitor the safety and quality performance within the Business Units (including the defined KPI

and goals for the BUs) e) Review customer complaint related issues to secure customer satisfaction f) Ensure that appropriate resources are allocated to achieve safety and quality performance

beyond regulatory compliance

These tasks are executed based on the Group Quarterly Quality & Safety Report. Inputs for this report are taken from the Safety Action Group results and are retrieved from various data sources such as the auditing system, occupational accident reporting, and the occurrence & hazard reporting. Inputs and data are prepared by all Quality Managers, the Head of OSHE and the Safety & Risk Officer. A preparatory meeting with the attendance of the BU Head, the Quality Manager and the Safety & Risk Officer takes place up to 7 days prior to the Form 4 Holder Meeting.

The data gathered are clustered and analyzed in order to determine main issues and concerns on SR Technics and BU level. Identification and monitoring of trends will also be reported on the Group Quarterly Quality & Safety Report. Specific actions or campaigns are identified and agreed during the Form 4 Holder meeting to address the shortfalls at SR Technics’ level as well as on BU level, aiming to improve the overall safety performance of SR Technics Group. The accepted report will be signed and released by the Accountable Manager and the VP OQ.

Participants:

• VP OQ (chairperson and organizer) • Accountable Manager Part 145/ M / 21 • Form 4 Holders of “productive” business units • Safety & Risk Officer • CEO (optional)

The requirements for the Form 4 Holder Meeting are in reference to the EN 9110 5.6 Management review.

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.2.2 Safety Review Board (SRB) The Safety Review Board is organized by the VP OQ and the Safety & Risk Officer. Participants include the Business Unit leaders as well as possible external participants like customers and OEM/ vendors as required. It shall take place at least once a year. The SRB has an independent monitoring function of the entire Safety Management System (see chapter 1.3 Figure 2). During the SRB meeting mainly high and moderate risk occurrences/ audit findings and other occurrences/ hazards based on the request of the SRB Members are randomly reviewed. The SRB has the authority to dictate further actions as e.g. additional audits or redoing of the root cause analysis.

Changes to the Safety Policy are given as a suggestion to the Form 4 Holder Meeting (see chapter 1.2.1) who has the final authority to change it. Another aim includes the promotion of a positive safety culture within SR Technics, which is for e.g. cultivated through safety awareness campaigns. The minutes and presentations of the SRB can be found on the SRB folder (limited access).

Participants:

• Accountable Manager Part 145/ M / 21 (chairperson) • VP OQ (organizer) • Form 4 Holder Aircraft Services • Form 4 Holder Engine Services • Form 4 Holder Component Services • Form 4 Holder Line Maintenance International • Safety & Risk Officer • CEO (optional)

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.2.3 Safety Action Group (SAG) The Safety Action Group is organized and chaired by the Safety & Risk Officer. Participants include the Quality Managers and the Business Unit representatives nominated by the respective BU Head. The SAG generally takes place once a month. Its main purpose is to do an in-depth review of select moderate and high risk Occurrence & Hazard Reports (see section 2.2) and audit findings. The root cause analysis and the resulting preventive actions are challenged concerning the completeness, the correctness of the conclusions and the appropriateness of initiated actions. The initiated actions will be evaluated as potential best practices for the company. The SAG is also responsible to keep the SMS folder (see chapter 1.5.1) up to date. The minutes, presentations and open tasks of the SAG can be found on the SAG SharePoint site The selected BU representatives are the focal point for transferring information to and from the SAG.

a) To support the BU efficiently, they therefore need to be well-trained and knowledgeable in various applicable root cause analysis methodologies. Their main responsibilities include: Coordinating the root cause analyses selected for presentation at SAG. This includes ensuring that the person best suited to present the case, usually the one who led the root cause analysis, is present at the SAG.

b) Providing feedback on lessons learned from the SAG to their respective BU. c) Ensuring representation of their BU at all SAG meetings. The nominated BU representatives are

expected to attend at least 80% of all scheduled SAG meetings in person. If they cannot attend in person, a deputy, who should not already be a BU representative at SAG, needs to be advised.

Participants:

• Safety & Risk Officer (organizer) • VP OQ • Quality Managers • Aircraft Services representative(s) • Engine Services representative(s) • Component Services representative(s) • Line Maintenance Int. representative(s) • Logistics representative(s)

http://collab.sp.srtechnics.com/ts/Quality/SAG/default.aspx

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.2.4 Airport Safety Committee Zurich Airport (ASC) meeting The Airport Safety Committee meeting is organized by the Safety Office of the Flughafen Zürich AG. The ASC is held approximately every three months. Its purpose is to promote the exchange between safety responsible persons of different companies at the airport and to discuss safety issues of general concern. From SR Technics is represented by the Safety & Risk Officer.

Participants are all the key holders at the Zurich Airport.

1.2.5 Geneva Airport Revue des Safety Reports Meeting The Geneva Airport (GVA) Revue des Safety Reports Meeting is held approximately once a month. Its main purpose is to review all findings which are related to last months GVA occurrence reports. They are analyzed to define which measures have to be taken in order to improve the general safety of the operations at the airport. Participants of the meeting include handling providers as well as the companies which are involved during the operation and the transit of the aircraft. SR Technics takes part at the meeting with a safety representative from Geneva Line Station.

Participants are all the key holders at the Geneva Airport

1.2.6 Technical Training Committee (FAST) The Technical Training Committee meets regularly and is organized by the Head of Production Training Aircraft Services. Its purpose is to assess the need for training, evaluate the technical and authority related trainings and to find solutions to fulfill the training requirements from SR Technics and the related Authority. Amongst others, it also serves as a feedback loop for Human Factor classes out of practical experiences of the business. The responsibilities are described in detail in G-001-011-WI.

Participants:

Head of Production Training Aircraft Services (organizer and chairman)

Designated representatives of all SR Technics divisions as specified on the SR Technics top level organization chart published on the org. manager

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/documentation/GroupProceduresManual/001%20Committees%20and%20Statutes/001%20Committees%20and%20Statutes/G-001-011-WI.PDF

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.2.7 Quality Surveillance Meeting (CAM) The Continuing Airworthiness Management - Quality Surveillance Meeting is a coordination board in respect of continuing airworthiness management and quality issues according to EASA Part M.A.712. The meeting is organized regularly by the VP OQ and chaired by the Continuing Airworthiness Manger. Its main purpose is to ensure a full and effective co-ordination between Continuing Airworthiness Management Organization (CAMO) and the Quality & Safety Department by reviewing any issues in respect to continuing airworthiness management and quality (see CAME 0.6.1).

Participants:

• Continuing Airworthiness Manager (chairperson) • VP OQ (organizer) • Quality Manager Part M • Office of Airworthiness

1.2.8 Occurrence risk assessment and clustering meeting The Risk Assessment, evaluation and clustering is done during the “Occurrence risk assessment and clustering” meeting which is held approximately twice a week. The participants include the VP OQ, the Quality Managers and the Safety & Risk Officer. The proceeding is described in detail in chapter 2.2.1.

Participants:

• Safety & Risk Officer (organizer) • VP OQ • Quality Managers

1.2.9 Customer meetings To have an exchange with customers regarding quality and safety regular meetings are performed. Such as e.g.:

• At Geneva with easyJet

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.3 Appointment of key safety personnel All members of staff at SR Technics are responsible for their own actions and may be held accountable by their supervisor or manager for the safe performance of their duties. Managers and supervisors are accountable for the overall performance of the people that report to them. Managers are also responsible for ensuring that their subordinates have the resources, training, experience, tools, equipment etc. needed for the safe completion of their assigned duties. The chain of accountability with regard to SMS in SR Technics is pictured in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Chain of accountability with regard to SMS in SR Technics

Saf

ety

Rev

iew

Boa

rd (S

RB

)

Accountable Manager

Form 4 Holder Meeting Safety Action Group (SAG) Si-Team Meeting

Head of OSHEQuality Managers

VP Group Quality, Safetyand Central Engineering

Safety & Risk Officer Steering / Controlling

Monitoring / Execution

Independent Monitoring

Saf

ety

Rev

iew

Boa

rd (S

RB

)

Accountable Manager

Form 4 Holder Meeting Safety Action Group (SAG) Si-Team Meeting

Head of OSHEQuality Managers

VP Group Quality, Safetyand Central Engineering

Safety & Risk Officer Steering / Controlling

Monitoring / Execution

Independent Monitoring

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.4 Coordination of emergency response planning A description of the “Emergency Organisation”, “Alarm Organisation” and other relevant topics can be found in the SR Technics Crisis Management Handbook (CMH). The CMH is not publicly available but will be distributed by OQS in case of an emergency. It is also regularly distributed to the crisis committee members and their deputies during training. The definition of a crisis is as follows: If an Incident… • becomes difficult to handle • arises the suspicion of mass media, government or authorities • affects business activities negatively

or if… • decisions may have significant influence for the future of the company. Instructions for employees on how to react in emergency situations can be found on the emergency section on the intranet home page of OSHE. The emergency situations considered include: • Accidents • Evacuation • Fire • Pandemic • Defibrillation

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/oshe/emergency/Pages/default.aspx

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/oshe/emergency/Pages/default.aspx

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

1.5 SMS Documentation 1.5.1 SMS Folder The SMS Folder is an uncontrolled hardcopy with the purpose to give an overview of the most important SMS topics for employees (chapters 1-5). Additionally, there is a chapter (6) with background information and the legal basis of the SMS which is primarily addressing the management. In detail, the folder contains the following chapters: 1 Safety & Quality Policy

• Safety & Quality Policy SR Technics • Occupational Health, Safety and Environment

2 SMS basics • SMS Classroom Training

3 SMS in SR Technics • Occurrence Reporting • Reporting Process Poster • Risk Impact Table • Risk Matrix • SMS Flyer • Safety First • SMS Homepage • SMS Manual

4 Continuation Training • CTB OQ 10-002 • Safety Flash October 2011 • SWANS Flyer

5 Questions & Answers • Questions & Answers for employees

6 Additional information • FOCA SMS-001 • FOCA SMS-002 • FOCA STUB • ICAO SMS Implementation Annex 1 • ICAO SMS Implementation Annex 2 • ICAO SMS Implementation Annex 3 • ICAO SMS Implementation Annex 4

The content of the SMS folder can be found electronically in the intranet. The Business Units are responsible to break down the information to each employee. It is also their responsibility to keep the SMS folder distribution list up to date. The SMS folder is updated regularly by the Safety Action Group (see chapter 1.2.3).

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/sms/smsfolder/Pages/default.aspx

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/sms/smsfolder/Pages/default.aspx

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

2 Safety Risk Management To systematically and formally identifying hazards and occurrences, assessing the risk, analyzing the risk and controlling the risk three quality and safety streams are used. These three streams are visualized in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Quality and safety streams

2.1 Hazard Identification 2.1.1 Occurrence & Hazard Reporting The Occurrence & Hazard Reporting is mainly used as reactive method of occurrence identification, and also serves as a proactive method so that employees are encouraged to report hazards before such hazards lead to a negative event.

The purpose of the Occurrence & Hazard Reporting is that information about hazards is collected and then risk assessed. Only with the knowledge of existing or potential risks, can negative trends be recognized and stopped with corrective and preventive actions.

For SR Technics it is important to differentiate between safety issues which have been “picked up” within SR Technics, even if it was after the dedicated process step, and safety issues which have “slipped” through our system and were discovered and reported by another party. The former are understood as internal reports, near-misses or hazards which have potentially to be investigated depending on the risk. The latter are occurrences (potential MORs see 2.2.4) where it needs to be understood why they occurred and additionally why they have not been discovered within our system.

To report an occurrence or a hazard, a centralized software solution is used, which is available to all staff through various computer stations at the working locations. The link to Occurrence & Hazard Reporting” is located at the home page (entry page) of the intranet and provides instructions on how to access the tool, as shown in Figure below.

Besides reporting via the established software solution, there is also the possibility to report an occurrence/ hazard via an email to [email protected], via internal post to Occurrence & Hazard Reporting SRT Quality & Safety or via voice box +41 58 688 6363 (anonymously).

Anonymity of reporting through the mentioned tools is also ensured.

http://occrep.intranet.srtechnics.com/

http://occrep.intranet.srtechnics.com/

mailto:[email protected]

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

Figure 4: Occurrence & Hazard Reporting link

The Occurrence & Hazard Reporting is in general a tool to identify those instances where routine procedures have failed, may fail or could not have been followed.

An Occurrence & Hazard report has to be made for (please note that this is not an exhaustive list): • any occurrence or hazard which has an impact on flight safety or security • any occurrence or hazard which has an impact on regulatory requirements • any occurrence or hazard which indicates a systematic problem in SR Technics • any occurrence or hazard which causes financial damage (damage case / internal costs) • any occurrence or hazard which has an impact on customers of SR Technics • any occurrence or hazard which has an impact on business objectives of SR Technics • any occurrence or hazard which has an impact on SR Technics IT or technology (not daily IT

issues which are handled via IT Ticketing) • any hazard which has an potential impact • any voluntary Occurrence & Hazard report

In the example below (see Figure) the form to report an occurrence or hazard is shown. The reporter is asked to enter as much information as possible relating to the occurrence or hazard. The quality of the information reported is very important. The better the quality of the information supplied the more accurate the assignment and initial risk assessment will be and the more effective the investigation to identify its root cause.

However, it is very important for Quality & Safety that a report is made. It would be wrong to abstain from reporting due to fear of not being able to fill out all fields. If the initiator is unsure of what to write in some fields, the respective spaces can be left blank. When receiving the report, the missing information can be gained by further enquiry. Even if the report was filled out anonymously, it is better to have some information about the occurrence/hazard than being unaware of it.

To fill out the form with the required information should be self-explanatory.

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

Figure 5: Occurrence & Hazard Reporting form

After the report is submitted within the “Occurrence risk assessment and clustering” meeting (chapter 2.2.1) the risk of the report will be evaluated and an investigator assigned. The investigator has to investigate the root cause and define if possible corrective and preventive action(s). Latest when the root cause and the defined actions are approved and by the affected Quality Manager and the actions implemented the initiator will receive a feedback.

2.1.2 Business Unit Risk Logs Hazard Identification The Business Unit Risk Logs are a proactive mean to identify risks. Every Business Unit is tasked to keep their Risk Logs up to date (with support of the respective Quality Managers). Any threats resulting in a risk level ≥ 16 must be considered for further defenses. If a risk on the Business Unit Risk Logs is considered to be ≥ 1.25 million USD, it has to be brought up to the Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) level and assigned to an ERM reference number, as described in chapter 3.1.2. Threats ≤ 4 can be accepted without further defenses.

A sample of Business Unit Risk Logs can be found in Annex X1.

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

2.2 Risk assessment and mitigation The process of closure of audit findings, Occurrence & Hazard Reports is described in Process Landscape process ID 122. Important parts of this process are also the defining of timeframes and the extension of these timeframes if required. This is described within the G-046-001-WI.

Details about management of Risk Assessment & Assignment, Classification, Audit Findings Levels, Occurrence & hazard report and MOR can be found in the general description of the process step “Risk assessment & Assignment” part of ID122. It is Safety & Risk Officer’s responsivity to support the harmonization of Risk Assessment of the occurrences as well as audit finding classification based on the Assessed Risk.(See also Par 2.2.)

2.2.1 Occurrence Evaluation & Clustering Within the “Occurrence risk assessment and clustering” meeting (chapter 1.2.8), it is assessed if an occurrence (including proactive reported hazards) is a “safety” relevant report and could be assigned to a “cluster”, or whether it is a “personal” report. Clusters are a summary of similar cases, like e.g. incorrect packaging which results in a damage. Occurrences and hazards within a cluster usually are given all the same risk index (see next chapter). Personal reports are such which are caused e.g. by frustration and contain incriminations etc. A feedback is given to such occurrence & hazard reports but then they are closed without further investigation. Such occurrences and hazards are usually classified as “insignificant” (see chapter 2.2.2).

Safety related and other relevant occurrences (including proactive reported hazards) which cannot be clustered are further risk assessed and an investigator defined to perform a root cause analysis.

Evaluated risks with a level of 16 or higher can be potentially escalated to Business Unit Risk Logs and to the ERM (chapter 3.1.2).

Figure 6: Occurrence & Hazard Evaluation & Clustering Occurrence Reports will be classified during the Occurrence risk assessment & clustering meeting will be classified as reported in the table below: Occurrence (OHR) Mandatory Occurrence MOR

Caused by SRT Caused by External Caused by SRT Caused by External

Reported by SRT

IOR EOR MOR MOR

Reported by External

EOR EOR MOR Op MOR Op

Occurrence or Hazard

Occurrence risk assessment and clustering meeting

If cluster possible

Personal

Safety &

others

General feedback

Investigation No cluster possible

Summary of occurrence and hazard results & feedback

Cluster 1

Cluster 2

Cluster 3

http://moe.intranet.srtechnics.com/MOE_57/html/p30.htm

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/documentation/GroupProceduresManual/040%20Quality%20and%20Safety/046%20SMS%20(Safety%20Management%20System)/G-046-001-WI.PDF

http://moe.intranet.srtechnics.com/MOE_57/html/index.htm?xml=p67&unique=5266u


Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

2.2.2 Risk Impact Table and Risk Matrix In order to classify Occurrence & Hazard Reports, Audit Findings or threats on the Business Unit Risk Logs, the Risk Impact Table (G-156-001-F02) is used. Below is reported an example of the mentioned Table (Figure 7).

Impact Classification

1 Insignificant (Multiplier =1)

2 Minor (Multiplier =2)

3 Moderate (Multiplier =4)

4 Major (Multiplier =8)

5 Catastrophic (Multiplier =16)

A (former A, G, K)

Business Objectives

- Negligible impact upon objectives

- Business impacted by 1 day

- Minor effects that are easily rectified

- Business impacted 1-2 days

- Some objectives are affected

- Business impacted up to 1 week

- Some important objectives cannot be achieved

- Business impacted 1-2 weeks

- Most objectives cannot be achieved

- Business impacted more than 2 weeks

C (former C, H, I)

Customer / Reputation

- Customer annoyance

- Aircraft - LOOM up to 6 hours

- AOG up to 3 hours

- Engine / Component -1 day

- Customer dissatisfaction / complaints

- Aircraft - LOOM 6-12 hours

- AOG 3-6 hours

- Engine / Component 1-3 days

- Isolated negative local media coverage

- High customer dissatisfaction / repetitive complaints

- Aircraft - LOOM 12-48 hours

- AOG 6-24 hours


- Limited media coverage. Reputation affected with some stakeholders

- Significant level of customer dissatisfaction

- Aircraft- LOOM 2-5 days

- AOG 1-3 days


- Significant affect o strategic partnership

- Extended national media coverage. Reputation affected with stakeholders

- Customer loses confidence (loss of key account customer)

- Aircraft - LOOM over 5 days

- AOG over 3 days

- Engine / Component > 20 days

- Breakdown in strategic partnership

- Extended international media coverage. Reputation long term affected

D

Environment

- Minor breach in internal procedure, insignificant impact to environment

- Minimal impact to environment, contained within operational area

- Medium impact to environment, containment required

- Significant impact to environment on-site

- Long term environmental implications and potential impacts to third parties

E

Health, Safety

- First aid injuries (including medical diagnostic but excluding any form of treatment)

- Injuries requiring out-patient medical treatment only

- Injuries resulting in absence requiring doctor’s note as per HR procedure

- Injuries resulting in short term (<4 weeks) restriction of motion or light duty workplace

- Injuries requiring hospital stay (inpatient treatment)

- Injuries requiring surgery - Serious but non-permanent injuries (lost time injuries)

- Permanent injuries not resulting in restriction of mobility (e.g. stiff finger)

- Loss of consciousness

- Falls from heights

- Head injuries

- Electro shock

- Injuries close to vital systems

- Contact with extremely dangerous chemicals

- Injuries resulting in long term (≥4 weeks) restriction of motion or light duty workplace

- Work-related chronic irreversible disease or cases of cancer

- Permanent disability resulting in restriction of mobility

- Loss of eye sight

- Fatalities

F (former B, F)

Regulatory Requirements / Flight Safety

- Non-compliance with internal procedures, non-safety relevant observations - Recommendations

- An incident which could be safety relevant, but does not breach a regulatory requirement

- Recommendations

- Finding which could become relevant for approval in future

- An incident which possibly hazards flight safety and/or lowers safety standards.

- Breach of regulatory requirements

- Consider as MOR

- Threat of partial loss of approval

- An incident which possibly hazards the flight safety and lowers safety standards

- Consider as MOR

- Partial loss of approval

- An incident which hazards seriously the flight safety and lowers safety standards & has impact on Airworthiness

- Consider as MOR

- Loss of main approval

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/documentation/GroupProceduresManual/150%20Finance%20Management/156%20Risk%20Management/G-156-001-F02.PDF


Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

J

Technology / IT

- Single business critical system failure that is rectified within 3 hours. Minimal effect on business

- New or enhanced system requires minimum adjustments

Single business critical system failure that is rectified within 3 – 6 hours. Minimal effect on business

- New or enhanced system requires minor adjustments

Medium level outage of business critical system that affects business for 1 – 3 days

- New or enhanced system requires moderate adjustments

Significant level outage of business critical system that affects business for more than 3 days

- New or enhanced system requires major adjustments

Unrecoverable system failure in business critical systems. Serious and sustained impact on operations

- New or enhanced system requires significant adjustments

M

Security

Criminal offence to the detriment of SR Technics, e.g. it's infrastructure, reputation and data, as well to the detriment of SR Technics staff, or

any other stakeholder of SR Technics with…

…insignificant damage >150 CHF Negligent offences against aviation security regulations, no consequences

…minor damage. >500 CHF Negligent offences against aviation security regulations with small danger potential

…moderate damage. >1000 CHF Offences against aviation security regulations with minor impact

…major damage. >5’000 CHF Offences against aviation security regulations which endanger the secure operation

…huge damage. >10’000 CHF Offences against aviation security regulations which cause criminal actions or official investigations

N (former L, N)

Financial / Damage Case / Internal Costs

- 0 – 5’000 CHF / Case

5’001 – 50’000 CHF / Case - 50’001 – 100’000 CHF / Case

- <5% deviation in BU PNL*

- <5% impact of BU revenue

* profit and loss (income statement)

- 100’001 – 250’000 CHF / Case

- 5% - 10% deviation in BU PNL

- 5% - 10% impact of BU revenue

- > 250’000 CHF / Case

- >10% deviation in BU PNL

- >5% impact of BU revenue

- Restatement of financials

Figure 7: Risk Impact Table The Risk Impact Table currently defines 8 classification categories and can be found in the intranet. The occurrence / hazard is assigned to one of the categories and then the impact is assessed according to the descriptions given within the category. When the impact is determined, the next step is to consult the Risk Matrix (G-156-001-F01). Below is reported an example of the mentioned Matrix (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Risk Matrix




Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

The impact together with the frequency defines the risk of the occurrence / hazard. As can be seen in the Risk Matrix, four cases are possible:

• Insignificant: The case is opened in the occurrence system but no action is taken. The originator is informed that no action is taken but it will stay in the system. The originator can intervene, should he / she disagree with the assessed risk.

• Minor: The case is opened in the occurrence system and sent for processing to the responsible persons. They have to perform a root cause analysis and define corrective as well as preventive actions.

• Moderate: Same proceeding as for ‘minor’ cases. Additionally, the occurrence is discussed in the next Safety Action Group (SAG) meeting and potentially in the Safety Review Board (SRB).

• High: Same proceeding as for ‘minor’ cases. Additionally, the occurrence is discussed in the next Safety Action Group (SAG) meeting and potentially in the Safety Review Board (SRB).

2.2.3 Levels of Audit Findings: The assignment of the Level of Findings is evaluated based on the assessed Risk as per equivalency shown here below:

• Risk Level 32-80 is classified as a Level 1 finding • Risk Level 8-24 is classified as a Level 2 finding • Risk Level 1-6 is classified as a Level 3 finding

Assignment of higher level of finding, despite of the equivalency shown above, is allowed based on the judgement of the respective Quality Manager, depending on the sensitiveness of the case. This specifically applies when the Risk Level may be low due to low probability but high severity (Ref Risk Impact Table) Any assignment of higher level of finding shall be communicated to the Safety & Risk Officer in order to allow further evaluation. It is Safety & Risk Officer’s responsibility to evaluate such cases and provide feedback to the QM if the Level assignment is not agreed.

2.2.4 Mandatory Occurrence Reports SR Technics Switzerland must report to the competent authority, the state of registry and the organization responsible for the design of the aircraft or component any condition of the aircraft or component identified by SR Technics that has resulted or may result in an unsafe condition that hazards seriously the flight safety in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014, Annex II, point 145.A.60.

Any occurrence has to be checked, if it fulfills the criteria of a Mandatory Occurrence Report (MOR). Reportable occurrences to the competent authority are described in (EU) No 376/2014 will apply from the 1st April, 2016. The reportable occurrences relevant for SR Technics are described under Article 4 b) “Occurrences related to technical conditions, maintenance and repair of aircraft”.

If the requirements are met for further reporting to the FOCA, NAA and/or operator a first report must be submitted to the applicable authority in accordance with (EU) No 376/2014 required deadlines.

Requirements related to Reporting Criteria related to all applicable foreign approvals of SR Technics can be found within the respective Supplements to the MOE and CAME in the company Intranet.

Flow of information, main deadlines and stages of reporting will be followed as per diagram reported below. (Ref. Guidance Material of Regulation (EU) No 376/2014)


Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

Details about management of Risk Assessment & Assignment, Classification, Audit Findings Levels, Occurrence & hazard report and MOR can be found in the general description of the process step “Risk assessment & Assignment” part of process ID122.

2.2.5 Root cause analysis If an audit finding or an occurrence/ hazard is classified as minor, moderate or high, a root cause analysis has to be performed. The analysis should be done making use of the so-called DMAIC process, which stands for: • Define • Measure • Analyze • Improve • Control

If an audit finding or an occurrence/ hazard is classified as moderate or high a root cause analysis in accordance to the work instruction G-020-003-WI has to be performed. This work instruction can also be used as a guide for lower risk items.

2.2.6 MEDA Analysis (as required) The Maintenance Error Decision Aid (MEDA) is a structured process developed by Boeing used to investigate events caused by maintenance technician and/or inspector performance. A user’s guide is publicly available at the ATEC homepage. Within SR Technics, it may be used to investigate occurrences and hazards, if it is unclear after an event whether or not incorrect or neglected processes, insufficient communication, unclear responsibilities or human behaviour must be considered as the cause.

If an occurrence or hazard has a moderate or high risk and the root cause category (6M) is defined as “Man” a MEDA investigation has to be performed.

The MEDA analysis covers the following topics:

• General information about the occurrence • Description of the event • Maintenance error specific information • Contributing factors checklist • Error prevention strategies

http://moe.intranet.srtechnics.com/MOE_57/html/index.htm?xml=p67&unique=5266u


http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/documentation/GroupProceduresManual/020%20Continuous%20Improvement/020%20Continuous%20Improvement/G-020-003-WI_E.PDF

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

Detailed information about the application of MEDA within SR Technics and the form used for the investigation can be found in the SR Technics MEDA description.

2.2.7 HFACS The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) identifies the human causes of an Occurrence and provides a tool to support the Root Cause Investigation and consequent prevention efforts.

HFACS is based on the "Swiss Cheese" model of human error which looks at four levels of active errors and latent failures including “Inappropriate acts”, “Preconditions for inappropriate acts”, “Unsafe Supervision”, and “Organizational Influences” (Ref. Figure 9)

The HFACS scheme is integrated in the computer based SR Technics Occurrence reporting and analysis system.

Figure 9: SR Technics HFACS scheme

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/tools/operations/Documents/MEDA/MEDA_form_and_guide_en.doc

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

3 Safety Assurance 3.1 Safety performance monitoring and measurement

3.1.1 Safety Key Performance Indicators (SKPIs) The following Safety Key Performance Indicators (SKPIs) have been defined:

SKPI 01 – Culture The reporting culture of SR Technics

is measured visually by the increase of the gap between the number of Occurrence Reports and the average of the risk level. The number of Occurrence Reports is an indicator for reporting culture, the risk level is an indicator for critical for safety.

SKPI 02 – Process compliance The process compliance is measured

visually by the gap between audit findings and the risk level average. The audit findings are an indicator for well working processes as well as competence of audited personnel, the risk level average is an indicator for absence of high risk or safety issue concerning process.

SKPI 03 – Work accidents / 1000 FTE

This SKPI is measured in relation to the headcount (accidents per 1000 full time employees) in order to make the figures comparable. A major occupational accident is an accident with more than 24 hours of lost time. “Others” is all accidents with 24 hours of lost time or less. Most of them are no lost time accidents.

The three SKPIs are evaluated regularly and presented on the visual board within the OQ department. Additionally, they are reviewed in the Quarterly Quality & Safety Report.

These additional KPIs can also include Quality and Safety issues.

For a sample evaluation of the reporting culture for the visual board, see Appendix X2.

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

3.1.2 Measuring and monitoring the Operational Enterprise Risk at an operational level Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) is a risk based approach to managing an enterprise. It includes the methods and processes used by the enterprise to identify particular events or circumstances that have an impact on the enterprise objectives (risks and opportunities), assessing them in terms of magnitude of impact and likelihood, determining a measurement strategy and monitoring the progress.

The ERM is a top down approach. In order to capture all the necessary measurements of the operational risks at the Enterprise level, SRT has integrated these risks in its operational business risk logs (chapter 2.1.2). This will ensure a bottom up approach where the risk measurements put in place will constantly be monitored by the business units and will be brought back up to the enterprise level if required on a regular basis.

All operational risks and their associated measurements that are still on-going (not completed) from the Enterprise Risk log are to be transferred onto the operational business risk logs. These are identified exactly the same as on the Enterprise Risk log for traceability (e.g. O-01). The associated measurements are to be named as existing defenses.

Any new threats identified on the operational business risk logs that result in a risk higher or equal to 32 (“red corner”) have to be taken into consideration for the Enterprise Risk Log and be visible on the Enterprise level. Additionally also if a risk on the Business Unit Risk Logs is considered to be ≥ 1.25 million USD, it has to be brought up to the ERM level and assigned to an ERM reference number.

A sample of ERM references in Business Unit Risk Logs can be found in Appendix X1

3.1.3 Risk Portfolio To monitor the safety performance of SR Technics the Safety Manager together with the Safety & Risk Officer develops a risk portfolio. The risk portfolio is a combination of trends out of analyzed data (e.g. from the occurrence and hazard reporting) as well as subjective trends which have been observed. The risk portfolio is discussed during the Form 4 Holder Meeting to define actions to be taken if necessary. The risk portfolio can also be discussed during the Safety Review Board meeting to give inputs to the Form 4 Holder Meeting.

3.1.4 Safety Audits During internal and external audits also the Safety Management System or aspects of it are audited. The auditing is described in G-043-001-WI.

The safety audits are also an important tool concerning the continuous improvement of the SMS.

3.1.5 Process Audit (PA) The aim of a Process Audit is to ensure that the safety, operational, and commercial criteria for a product, service or activity are being fulfilled. This is achieved through the Process Audit Form; the systematic measurement, comparison with a standard, monitoring of processes, procedures, best practices and associated feedback. Each nominated person (manager, supervisor, leader, trainer…etc.) is responsible for Process Audits within their department on a given frequency or time frame. In order to get an understanding of the day to day adherence to, and adequacy of, procedures and processes, each department will conduct internal standards assurance assessments on behalf of their nominated persons. Unlike compliance audits, which concentrate on the end to end process, these random sample assessments are aimed at providing assurance that specific tasks within the department are being carried out as and when required and to the required standard. A standards assurance check using the Process Audit Form is a very good business improvement tool for the management team. The check will typically be conducted by some members of the department;

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/documentation/GroupProceduresManual/040%20Quality%20and%20Safety/043%20Quality%20Assurance/G-043-001-WI.PDF

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

therefore they will not necessarily be independent. The reviewers does not necessarily need to be a qualified or experienced auditor but will need to understand what the scope of the assessment is and what it is trying to achieve. These checks are managed at a local level, however any reports and associated findings identified during the audit should be raised in the Q-Pulse system and issued to the relevant personnel, within SR Technics, for investigation. The effectiveness and robustness of the standards assurance process should be reviewed and measured in all business areas.

3.1.6 FAIR Process

At SR Technics mistakes and errors remain unpunished. However we differentiate between mistakes and intentional violation or sabotage. To decide whether an incident was an inattentive mistake or an intentional violation we use the Fair Process which works as follows:

employer /employee employee

manage through appropriate disciplinary action (CH-164-332-F01)

via resp. HR Manager

did he/she know, that his/her action was

incorrect?

wouldanother person with

the same competence behave in the same

way under those circumstances?

no

employer

manage through improving performance-influencing factors (person, task, situation and environment)

did he/she intendto initiate a dangerous

situation?yes

did he/she act out of

self-interest?

no

yes no

yes

yes

no

LIABILITY

REACTION

How should the event / the disciplinary action be communicated?

Would a disciplinary action contribute to the safety culture? yes no

not at all as usual exemplary

intentionalmid negligent grossly negligentinattentive slightly negligentno fault

Figure 10: Fair-Process

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/documentation/GroupProceduresManual/160%20Human%20Resources/163%20HR-%20Current%20Employment/CH-163-001-F01_e.DOC

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

3.2 The management of change Within SR Technics, change is experienced and managed through various projects. This chapter shall outline the most common processes and tools which are used in change management and which SR Technics committed to work with.

3.2.1 Stages of change management Major change will not happen easily. Many factors contrive to stall and falter change such as, lack of trust, bureaucracy, politics, power struggles, lack of leadership etc. Therefore, it is SR Technics philosophy that change has to be actively managed with special emphasis on the involvement of the employees. A sophisticated model to manage change has been developed by P. Kotter. It described eight stages of change, as pictured below. This model is taught during the black belt training. It is a more detailed version of the popular “unfreeze, moving, freeze” model by K. Lewin.

Figure 11: Kotter’s eight steps to transform an organization (and the corresponding phases in Lewins model)

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

3.3 Continuous improvement of the SMS The continuous improvement of the SMS happens at different levels of the organization. At an operational level, the check of effectiveness of Occurrence and Hazard Reports improves the SMS by evaluating and strengthening existing defenses.

The Safety Review Board (SRB, see chapter 1.2.2) and the Form 4 Holder Meeting (see chapter 1.2.1) are regularly reviewing the safety performance and the Safety Management System itself. The Form 4 Holder Meeting reviews and defines the Safety and Quality Policy and sets goals for the individual BUs. It is also responsible to assure the Business Units (BUs) fulfill their goals and that they are in compliance with the Safety and Quality Policy.

Occurrences and hazards with a moderate or high risk level are potentially reviewed by the Safety Action Group (SAG). One of the SAGs tasks is to introduce the lessons learned from occurrences and hazards into the Human Factors and SMS recurrent training.

With regular safety audits the BUs are checked if they are on track concerning the maturity of the SMS.

Safe

ty R

evie

w B

oard

Form 4 Holder MeetingLT, Safety & Risk Officer

Safety Action GroupDepartment Management Team,

all QM, Safety & Risk Officer

Safety &

Quality Policy

Action Item

Safety Report(IOR, EOR, MOR)

Risk ≥ 16

12

MEDA Analysis

RCA

Goals per BU

Communication Training

Human Factor

Recurrent Training

SMS Rec.Training

quarterly

monthly

Risk

Portfolio

SM

S O

nePager

Operation per Business Unit

Figure 12: Interaction between Business, SAG, SRB and Form 4 Holder with regard to safety

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

4 Safety Promotion 4.1 Training and education 4.1.1 SMS Training The Safety Management Training is mandatory for every employee of SR Technics as defined within the Safety and Quality Policy. There are currently two versions available: the classroom training and the web based training. Whilst it is recommended for all staff to participate in a classroom training due to a higher learning effect, the WBT is primarily designed for those who do not have the possibility (e.g. due to lack of time or different location) to attend it.

The SMS classroom training is integrated into the “OSHE Day”. Every new member of SR Technics participates in an OSHE day within 6 months after employment. Further information can be found in the SR Technics training manual.

4.1.2 Human Factors Training The Human Factors Training is mandatory for most of the SR Technics employees as defined within the Safety and Quality Policy. The legal requirements are according to EASA Part 145.A.30. The training syllabus is based on the specifications in GM 145.A.30 (e) Personnel requirements.

Further information can be found in the SR Technics training manual.

4.1.3 Refresher Training A “refresher training“ has been developed in 2012 and rolled out in 2013. The concept of the training is to combine Human Factors, Safety Management System and OSHE into one continuation training sessions. The reason behind is that these three topics are going hand in hand with each other and have the same goals and principles. The training is done in a classroom, face to face and is interactive. The theory is shortly repeated and then actively applied within group exercises on cases which happened at SR Technics. Findings from random- and R-Inspections are potential inputs for the refresher training. Also the SMS posters (see chapter 4.2.5) are used during the training as a support for the attendees reflecting the main issues occurred at SR Technics.

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

4.1.4 Safety WBT of the Flughafen Zürich AG Every employee of SR-Technics Zurich who requests the V-permission1 for his/her airport badge needs to pass a Safety WBT of the Flughafen Zürich AG. The training covers the following topics: • Safety Management System (SMS) • Runway Safety • Ramp Safety • Human Factors (HF)

The HF topic and the SMS topic are additionally trained in separate courses offered by SR Technics.

4.2 Safety Communication As communication needs to remain flexible every activity cannot be prescribed in this manual. Therefore the following communication channels are used: • Corporate Communication is conducted to disseminate generic messages that are relevant to

everybody. They will typically relay company policy, objectives and strategic initiatives that require everyone to consider when back in their business unit. Examples of Corporate Communication media are; Hangar speeches which are conducted on an annual basis as a minimum. Safety display boards in hangars, workshops and walkways and internal communications published on the company Intranet (news area).

• Safety Management System related issues are communicated in the intranet on the Safety Management System area (our company / Safety Management System)

• Local Communication is conducted to convey messages that are specific to the working area or to reinforce corporate communication. Typically this is carried out in team meetings/ shift briefings or using written communication that must be signed by the individual to acknowledge that they have read and understood the message they have received.

4.2.1 Continuation training SR Technics uses the following means to ensure that the Certifying Staff and Category B1 and B2 Support Staff remain current in terms of procedures, technical knowledge and human factors and that the respective organization units receives feedback on the adequacy of its procedures:

Mean of information Purpose

Continuation Training Letter (CTL): If immediate action is required, published whenever needed.

Superintendent’s Verbal Review (SVR) As information and feedback, at least twice a year.

Continuation Training Infos (CTI) For all other information which are just for convenience reason.

Detailed descriptions of the release, evidence and other information about continuation training can be found in Group Process No. G-079-001-WI.

1 “V” stands for „Vorfeld“ or apron

http://wbt.zurich-airport.com/www/frame_index.html

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/news/Pages/default.aspx

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/sms/Pages/default.aspx

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/sms/Pages/default.aspx

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/documentation/GroupProceduresManual/070%20Aircraft%20Maintenance/079%20Technical%20Education/G-079-001-WI.PDF

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

4.2.2 Regular Updates On a regular basis, normally every week, the organization reviews within the centralized software the potential overdue actions triggered from audit findings and Occurrence & Hazard reports and the forecast of due items.

The status of audit findings and Occurrence & Hazard reports (inclusive MORs and customer complaints) can be checked within the centralized software.

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

4.2.3 STOP Campaign The STOP Campaign consists of two parts: The OSHE aspect aims to prevent future accidents and incidents and the “SMS self contribution” aspect focuses on learning from previous occurrences and raising awareness of potential hazards. Both parts contribute to developing a culture of proactive behavior towards safety within SR Technics: the ultimate goal of the STOP Campaign. The STOP campaign was launched on 17.10.2011 and announced with the October 2011 Safety Flash.

An important part of the STOP campaign is the Safety Charter. This is a commitment from the LT, Workers’ Council, OSHE, Facilities Management and Engineering to adopt a strong safety culture and ensure all safety rules are followed. Their signature on the Charter is a pledge to uphold our compliance to life saving rules, across the organization.

Additional information can be found on the STOP campaign intranet appearance.

Figure 13: SR Technics Safety-Charter

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/news/Documents/safetyflash_e.pdf

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

4.2.4 SMS Self Contribution The “SMS self contribution” aspects serves the purpose that each employee can identify him/ herself within the SMS. This is done by showing an example out of each BU which illustrates, how an individual contributed to safety (e.g. by reporting a hazard) or how the BU generally contributes to safety.

Figure 14: Concept of the SMS Self contribution aspect

The “SMS selfcontribution” posters (or “SMS OnePagers”) are individual to each BU. By providing a specific example of a BU and hanging up the posters in the respective BUs, the employees shall be able to identify themselves and recognize their contribution to SMS. A sample of a “SMS self contribution” poster of a BU can be found in Appendix X3. All the posters can be found on the “SMS self contribution” page in the intranet (Our Company / Safety Management System / SMS self contribution)

Additional to the Business Unit specific posters, an additional poster explaining the occurrence reporting process is also published (see Figure 15). The main purpose of this poster is to show the employees the feedback loop and the interaction with the Competent Authorities (CA).

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/sms/smscontrib/Pages/default.aspx

http://intranet.sp.srtechnics.com/company/sms/smscontrib/Pages/default.aspx

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

Figure 15: Occurrence reporting poster

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

X Appendix X1

Figure 16: Sample Risk Logs and ERM Reference Numbers

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

X2

Figure 17: Sample evaluation of the reporting culture for the visual board

X3

Figure 18: Sample poster for the ‘SMS self contribution campaign’ from a BU

Pri

nto

ut

of

do

cu

me

nt

is f

or

info

rma

tio

n o

nly

un

les

s v

eri

fie

d a

pp

rov

ed

sta

tus

in

DM

S



SR Technics

X4 Definition of “Cost of poor quality” Cost of poor quality consists of costs which result out of producing defective product and / or not conforming to established processes. It is the cost incurred -to close the gap between the expected / required and actual product or service quality. This cost includes all aspects of rework cost, including labor cost, disposition costs, and material costs. It also includes the cost of a lost opportunity or lost sale. Typical cost elements include but are not limited to:

- Cost of labor to fix the problem o Scrap and rework process o Troubleshooting and repair o Re-inspection and retest of reworked items o Travel and transportation cost, if repair at remote location required

- Cost of extra material

o Extra material required to repair the defect o Additional inventory required to support poor process yields o Cost of rented tools / equipment o Repair cost for damaged tools / equipment o Transportation cost for material

- Customer-related cost

o Penalties o Travel cost o Backup product to cover the failure periods o Cost of delays

- Cost for required support

o Cost for work sent externally o Cost for support resources needed to be brought in o Cost of additional administrative processes, such as re-sourcing

Cost of poor quality does NOT include the cost for conducting the root cause analysis, including potential preventive actions.

Safety Management System Manual SR Technics Switzerland Ltd. · 2017. 11. 17. · SR Technics...

Documents

Transcript of Safety Management System Manual SR Technics Switzerland Ltd. · 2017. 11. 17. · SR Technics...