American Eagle, the largest regional airline system in the world, implemented an effective safety management system that helped reduce total recordable injuries by 40% in a two-year period (and by 50% over a six-year period - from an average injury rate of 12.0 to 6.0 per 100 employees). Additionally, American Eagle gained the benefits of a strong operating discipline, which goes well beyond the employee injury  numbers — reducing lost workdays and aircraft ground damage and improving on-time performance.

“The effectiveness of an airline’s operating discipline is a measure of competitive advantage,” says Peter Bowler, President, American Eagle. “The DuPont Safety Management System gave us a framework that significantly improved operating discipline on the ground to support our excellent flight operating discipline.”

A major component of the airline’s safety management system is the executive steering team, co-chaired by the COO and vice president of customer service. It reviews system-wide injury performance progress, assuring resources and programs are in place to accomplish the employee safety culture change.

Employee Involvement Gets Safety Off Ground

The American Eagle hubs are its key safety management system focal points. The hubs are where most of the employee activity takes place and where most injuries occur. The line organization at each hub leads the safety management system, promoting interaction and teamwork at leadership levels among ramp, customer service, flight, in-flight and maintenance line managers. The hub central safety committee reviews progress and refines direction. All management levels are involved in setting high safety standards and challenging goals.

Subcommittees lead in key areas such as incident investigations and rules/procedures. Each hub has established a disciplined process to focus on the common goal — reducing employee injuries.
Functional injury prevention councils focus on their injury performance and special employee safety issues. One example of such issues was difficult-to-open aircraft doors. The flight attendant injury prevention council successfully tackled this issue.

An analysis of flight attendant reports showed doors on a specific aircraft type were associated with recurring flight attendant injuries. Further data collection and analysis showed that some, but not all, aircraft of this type had difficult-to-open/close doors. Flight attendants logged the door status after each flight using the aircraft tail number to build a database. Door-associated injuries have been reduced as the identified problems are worked on by maintenance (alignment and lubrication), and the door opening/closing procedure (employee hand, foot and weight placement) has been modified based on ergonomic recommendations.

“Thousands of man-days lost from work have been eliminated; the safety incident reporting system has become a more effective incident and ‘management’ system. Morale is up because our people feel empowered to fix problems that can cause injuries. We’re a better airline now,” concludes Bowler.