Guest Editorial: Speaking Up for Speaking Up

Sea & Shore, Summer, 2009 by Ryan C. Tillotson

Re: "Guest Editorial: Speaking Up for Speaking Up," Winter 2008-09, pg. 49

This guest editorial never should have been published. To honestly recommend that an inspector intentionally violate established safety procedures to see "a few COs burned" violates every safety standard for which the entire safety and ORM procedures were designed. The author's callous assumption that it is the CO's fault when an inspector violates approved safety requirements was, at best, uninformed and, at worst, violates Navy regulations and instructions.

I have been a devoted reader of the Naval Safety Center's products since I was the safety officer in USS John A. Moore (FFG-19) for my first department-head tour in 1996. Our ship also won the CNO's Safety Award for the entire West Coast in 1997, so I know what a great safety program looks like and, more importantly, how it functions on the deck plates. Also, my current ship, USS The Sullivans, received the Yellow "E" for safety this year.

I agree that our junior Sailors should feel empowered to speak up when they see seniors making safety mistakes. I have several Sailors in my ship now who have done exactly that with me. In each case, I thanked them for keeping me safe. In fact, the first time it happened was during my turnover week, while assuming command, when one of my DCTT members, a BM2, reminded me that I needed to wear hearing protection while in the vicinity of the SCBA refilling station.

I enjoy your articles, but this editorial was a mistake. I haven't seen the latest edition of Sea&Shore, as I'm deployed, and the mail takes a while to get to us. I only can hope that you have printed a retraction of this bad idea. Intentionally violating established safety procedures to see if anyone will say anything is equal to committing a crime to see if the police will show up and stop you from doing it. I expect better from an organization I have received outstanding advice from throughout my career.

Cdr. Ryan C. Tillotson, USN

CO, USS The Sullivans (DDG-68)

The author's response

Commander Tillotson is absolutely right. A correction is in order. Skipping a safety step during an evolution is an abysmally bad idea and definitely runs contrary to any notion of best practices. My intent was to add some sort of real-world test for safety awareness to the inspection process, without the risk of getting anyone hurt. A far better approach would be for the inspector to make a deliberate error in the pre-flight to an evolution (such as omitting to ask for some safety equipment called for by the MRC or inspection requirements). This would allow ship's-force personnel the chance to identify the problem before starting the evolution, without exposing anyone to real hazards. Under no circumstances should the inspectors continue with the evolution until the safety discrepancy is corrected. It was poor communication on my part, and the commander was absolutely right to call me on it.

I also apparently miscommunicated about the root cause of this mishap. Operator error in the form of ignoring established procedures on the part of the contractor was the cause of this mishap. That said, my contention was that the CO is responsible for the safety climate onboard his vessel. In the mishap described, two chief petty officers, whose rates required close familiarity with the equipment being inspected, utterly failed to correct a series of glaring safety discrepancies on the part of the inspector. To me, this speaks volumes about the safety leadership onboard the ship. Those chiefs either were unaware of the safety issues, or were willing to overlook those issues for some reason. Either way, the commanding officer needs to address the safety climate at his command. Any CO who allows violations of basic, black-letter safety rules deserves to get metaphorically burned, lest some of his crew get burned in actuality.

Once again, Cdr. Tillotson is absolutely right in his letter. I did a bad job communicating my meaning--in writing, no less. Good on him for catching both mistakes.

John Mapp

Safety Specialist, NNSY

Cdr. Tillotson's add-on comments

Mr. Mapp's contention that COs are responsible is spot on. It is my responsibility, but it's also a team effort.