Deviation from the norm occurs for a variety of reasons. Occasionally, the trigger is a mechanical failure or some external happenstance but in many cases it’s human factors like mistakes made or error of judgement in which case your immediate supervisor may want an accounting of your level of participation and your actions. Usually there are controls in place to document the screw up off chance snafu.
Does anybody else know about it?
Most likely people do and thus the written report!
Best practices: Refrain from filling a report while you might be hot under the collar. It won’t read well with your superior and your demeanor will be of note. It’s okay to jot down details or make a draft while events are fresh in your mind but wait until the next day when you are cool calm and collected before submitting a final revision.
To reduce the chances of self incrimination provide the facts short and on point. A lengthy story might reveal too much. Keep it concise. An incident report main purpose typically is to satisfy some bureaucratic need for documentation. Don’t raise questions that might not be asked.
Your report should not place blame or cast dispersion unnecessarily. There may be repercussions if you throw somebody under the bus.
polite and civil …
Narrative Summary of Event: Nearing the RWY for departure we received an Ops ACARS msg that ramp reported an access panel left open. Ground control cleared us to leave the (long)line for T.O. and hold in the RWY runup block. Ramp personnel arrived via xxx passenger van and requested that we shut down engine #2. The ramper determined that the open access panel was too high to reach. This flight crew then realized that they were focused on the Outflow Valve Door, which is always open during ground operations. The confusion cleared up we rejoined the line and departed. As flight crew we appreciate that the ground crew is observant for potential safety issues but would ask that they review this particular normal configuration so as to avoid a repeat mistake. The loss of position in the sequence delayed our flight 30 minutes.
CYA …
Narrative Summary of Event: Enroute, the FA reported a disruptive passenger (Seat 4C) to us via interphone. My read was that the passenger was upset over something was neither abusive nor threatening but had lost his temper. The FA did not consider this passenger to be a [TSA] threat level. We radioed ops to request a Customer Service Supervisor (who showed briefly with our code-25 release and then disappeared?!) be present during our arrival deplaning. The passenger requested a minute for a word with the flight crew at flights end and I was able to connect the individual with an Inflight Supervisor planeside. Witnesses from the flight offered that they thought that the disruptive passenger had been a "jerk" and attempted to console / re-assure our FA. My interest in this was to insure that there was no escalation. The inflight supervisor listened to his complaint and was able to placate and diffuse the situation.
sometimes it just can’t be …
Narrative Summary of Event: Informed by FA, Xxxx Xxxxxxxx, via interphone that a PCFA onboard our flight had misplaced their purse and that their weapon was carried in that purse. I instructed Xxxx to notify the other PCFA onboard of the situation. Xxxx called back less than 3-4 minutes later to inform me that the purse (and weapon) had been located and secured safely. Dispatch notified of the event enroute.
This sampling took place 20 years ago with identification redacted for the privacy of the guilty or the innocent. You might notice the narratives highlight the ability of words to persuade, inform, or affect outcomes but mostly it’s just routine paperwork and nothing comes of it. In any case tone is set by the power of the pen.
No one’s career was harmed but as for the hapless PCFA, one can only imagine.