Question

Write a 1 page essay regarding your most prevalent Hazardous Attitude ( at least 300-500 words). This can but does not need to be an aviation story. Tell me about a time when you faced one of the Hazardous Attitudes that you learned about. What happened? What was the attitude? What did you do? What did you learn?

Answer 1

Antiauthority

Pilots with an anti-authority attitude tend to believe that rules, regulations, and safety procedures don’t apply to them. For example, an anti-authority pilot may neglect their checklists or refuse to take advice from instructors or ATC. Be advised that having an anti-authority attitude is different from simply questioning authority. Pilots always have the prerogative to speak up to authority if they believe a mistake has been made.

• While a large portion of us don't care to admit it, at times we as a whole act as if the standards don't apply to us.
• If you've ever ended up cruising down the highway above the posted speed limit, hurrying to make it through a yellow traffic light, or rolling past a stop sign, at that point you hear what I'm saying.
• Now and then it appears to be that the standards simply don't apply in the particular circumstances, that they aren't that important, or that we can pull off disregarding them.

At the point when we find ourselves breaking the standards like this, we usually have ways to rationalize our behavior. "There was no traffic, and I was in a hurry...nobody was coming...conditions were perfect...you realize these roads were really designed for traveling at 70 miles an hour...." Occasionally, such lapses in judgment bring about an accident, however and still, at the end of the day we are probably going to find extenuating circumstances that assuage us of duty, for example, "That person just came all of a sudden," or, "There was a patch of ice on the road," or, "He wasn't using his blinkers."

• The same thing can happen in an airplane.
• To save a couple of moments of time, pilots in some cases abbreviate the traffic pattern or use non-standard passages, skip agendas, or fly nearer to the mists and in more unfortunate weather conditions than legally allowed. They rationalize these deviations with similar arguments, including, "There was no one else in the pattern," or, "I know the agenda forwards and backwards," or, "I've done this multiple times."

Psychological stressors are probably the most well-known cause of allowing antiauthority traits to run amuck. At the point when we feel a solid need to get some place, we can feel justified in bending the principles. At the point when our antiauthority attitude overpowers our decision making ability, we're squarely in the danger zone.

• Individuals who would prefer not to be determined what to do share the anti-authority attitude.
• They may think that "Nobody can mention to me what not to do".
• They may be angry of having somebody trying to guide them and may regard rules, regulations, and methods as unnecessary or senseless. While it is one's prerogative to address authority and search for mistakes, doing so constantly, and without looking for different arrangements, can lead to inconvenience.

At the point when a development worker has an anti-authority attitude, it can lead to major incidents. Tie-off regulations appear to be unnecessary, caution signs appear to be arbitrary, and personal insurance hardware appears to disrupts the general flow. The genuine hazards of falls, crushing, penetrates, and so forth are disregarded for the sake of comfort or convenience. They are justified with an anti-authority attitude as they might reveal to themselves that the principles don't apply in this given circumstance and that they can pull off disregarding them.