CIRP/CISM Evolves at ASTAR

CIRP/CISM Evolves at ASTAR

Redefining the CIRP/CISM model and the role it has played during the shutdown of DHL/ASTAR

Ground Zero

May 27th, 2008: DHL announces it will sell off the US operation to UPS. Our jobs are being outsourced after 25+ years of service.ASTAR MEC has no CIRP program in place.October 2008 Mark and Pierre are asked to ramp up a CIRP program.

Unique Leadership

By accident we were thrust into a curious leadership dynamic. Our MEC wanted a CIRP program in place quickly and had asked both of us to chair the committee.Opposites do attract. Being two very different people with different strengths and weaknesses, we found that we made a great team for this task.

ALPA CIRP and ICISF Models

Co-chairing lead us in two different directions.Mark follows ALPA CIRP core class schedule.Pierre starts on ICISF core courses including group intervention dynamics.

Getting the Message Out There

Call to Arms: Volunteers

CIRP/CISM being peer driven, we needed to find the right people for the job.CIRP needed people NOW!Getting a new team up and running posed new challenges.We picked our volunteers.

Call to Arms (continued)

We identified 35 pilot’s who met CIRP criteria, including high credibility among the pilot group and an empathetic attitude.Both of us vetoed 10 for no cause.25 pilots were asked if they would volunteer.We were hoping for 10 to say yes.

Call to Arms (continued)

22 said yes!!

Now What?

Wanting to get some sort of CIRP/CISM message to the rank and file quickly, we had to train our team and find an appropriate vehicle to deliver it.Using a hybrid of the NWA Pilot Assist Network and P2P phone tree models the Phone Blitz was born!Without MEC support, none of this is possible.

Phone Blitz

The idea was to divvy up the seniority list into equal parts, and conduct a phone defusing, using a specific script, along with an MEC message.Our thought process was to call everybody and using the SAFER-R model, “see” how they are doing, letting them “walk through” what they felt comfortable with. Ending with a message from the MEC.Team members were to try and establish a rapport with their assigned pilots for future calls.

Phone Blitz (continued)

Since we could not get our people ALPA/ICISF trained within the time constraints given by the MEC, we did some initial individual training sessions based on guidance from ICISF.Using scenario based training we brought our team up to speed, looking to backfill their training with ALPA/ICISF at a later date.


Splitting up our team into 2 flights, each of us leading one, we created a “bump up” procedure so that a volunteer’s lack of ALPA/ICISF training would minimize their exposure to problem situations.Any member who engaged in a phone defusing, and who felt they were in over their head was encouraged to “bump up” that person to their team leader.


While guidance from ICISF indicated that this was a good idea, (they agreed that a shutdown, furlough, or bankruptcy qualified as a CISM event) ALPA was not keen on the idea, partly because it wasn’t in the manual, and partly because no one had done something like this before.We were entering uncharted waters.


Another issue that ALPA was uneasy with was our lack of a MHP on staff or available. Within the local area, finding a CISM trained MHP wasn’t possible and the company didn’t have any provisions for one. Using Louise’s contacts, we were able to set up the use of a ALPA/ICISF CISM qualified MHP in the event we needed one in ILN quickly. This became an acceptable stopgap.


As the program developed and we started to backfill our CIRP needs, we found numerous CISM/ICISF qualified MHP’s in the south-central Ohio area, through the American Red Cross, who would be willing to help us.Strategic planning for other individual or group interventions became easier knowing that there were MHP’s available who would fit into the script per the CISM/ICISF models.


Statistically, we were looking at 5% of the pilot group not reacting well to the perceived intrusion by CIRP, and 5% utilizing CISM services due to the stress of the situation.The first round of phone calls were made during a 7 day stretch, and overwhelmingly, we were well received, and thanked, for reaching out to the pilot group.


While a few in the group questioned our motives, the majority were thankful to have a “ear” to lean on. The confusing nature of the information coming from the company and the union’s focus being on saving our jobs and putting us in the best possible position, human factors were lacking. A lot of pilot’s just needed to talk.


After action debriefing, and (PASS), yielded numerous nuggets of valuable information from our volunteers. We got a 3% “bump up”, and only a few pilot’s thought we were the Men in Black. Using information from the team we were able to more effectively form a battle plan for future phone blitz’s. The biggest result: it worked!

Initial Conclusions

Apolitical leadership structure worked for us. Mission over motives.Co-Chairing this committee created a unique working dynamic where we had a natural check and balance system in place to keep us on track.Without the right team members this venture could never have been pulled off. Hand picking the pilots who met the criteria to be a CISM volunteer is a must.

Initial Conclusions (continued)

Rapport was built between team members and the pilots on their phone lists.Follow up calls to those in crisis is vital to establishing trust and also helps stabilize those who use our services.Training handouts, scripting the event, and scenario based phone training easily prepared the team to move forward with confidence.“Bumping up” is a good way to apply a team approach to someone who is in crisis, without them thinking something is wrong.

Initial Conclusions (continued)

Emphasize the SAFER-R model. It is a great tool for the individual dynamic.Protect your volunteers. Keep them in the loop with the “plan,” but don’t give them busy work. They are in the muck doing much of the grunt work and need to be kept fresh while also realizing that they too are in crisis.PASS, or the equivalent is a must for your volunteers as a way for them to get clean of the event.

Backfilling a New Program

Having success with the Phone Blitz and creating a positive presence in the crew lounge and with management, we had to fill out the training requirements for our team.Jim Woodke came to ILN and trained the group in ALPA’s introductory CIRP course.During this time we created CISM based handouts that we hoped would facilitate getting the message out to the rank and file that help was only a phone call away.

Oct 2008 to Jan 2009

In the 4 months after being tasked by our MEC we had; set up the initial committee structure, formed our team, trained them in house for a specific event, completed that event, created our handouts, Mark completed the ALPA initial CIRP course requirements, Pierre completed all the ICISF core courses, and the team got initial training done by Jim Woodke. Not a bad start.But it was just the beginning.

Protocols

Now that the initial, albeit frantic, MEC task had been completed, we became painfully aware of our need to fill out protocols for the numerous situations that ASTAR CIRP ought to prepare for.Strategic planning, while continuing to offer our pilots CIRP one on one services, became our operational mantra.

Protocols (continued)

Mark dealt with the day to day operation of how to best serve the pilot group and their CISM needs as more bad news flowed from the company. Teaching recurrent at the ILN hub created an opportunity for an “on scene”snapshot of the atmosphere within the pilot group, as well as doing face to face CISM work.Pierre worked on the administrative task of identifying and creating CISM protocols, while following up with pilots who called him, or had been bumped up.


As we further tweaked the look of upcoming phone events, while strategic planning for those events that would require CISM services, we became aware of the need for dealing with group dynamics and how this would effect the look of our CISM program.It became our belief that there were potentially many more protocols that would require group intervention techniques rather than individual, and that if group was used properly, individual would be used concurrently.


Four events led to this conclusion;1. Union meetings across the field where behavior

reportedly became unruly.2. Our MEC’s need to have numerous “town hall” type

meetings where a lot of information would need to be disseminated.

3. Pierre’s belief in group intervention because of his training with ICISF and conversations with ICISF Pres. T. McSherry and co-founder Dr. Jeff Mitchell

4. A real time event Mark was involved in.

Philosophical Chaos

Thus, we came to a fork in the road when it came to using group vs. individual crisis intervention techniques within our pilot group.Because of the non-traditional CIRP issues we were now dealing with and a few personal experiences that could have used group intervention, and didn’t, we shifted our focus to the benefits that could be gained by using group interventions.

Strategic Planning

We identified 34 possible events, as a start, that needed to be planned, from; furloughs and shutdown, rejected takeoffs and air turn backs, domestic and international aircraft incidents and or accidents, hijackings , FFDO weapon discharge, LODD, suicide, to workplace violence. Overwhelmingly, the majority of these events when planned using the ICISF models, required a multitude of group intervention techniques to properly mitigate the stress of the event.

Strategic Planning (continued)

While the particulars of planning for these events are important, we looked at the dynamics of group crisis intervention within almost all of our strategic plans.Using a CMB model would be more than adequate for the MEC as a way to set realistic boundaries while conducting town hall meetings with the pilot group, LODD and suicides were a whole different animal.

Applying Group

The CISM models presented were pragmatically applicable to Law Enforcement, Fire and Rescue agencies. Recognizing the complexities and ever changing dynamics of those professions, it was not hard to apply the CISM Group model to our airline.We, as airline pilots, are a homogeneous, primary group, much like LE, Fire, and Rescue. We have common goals and are expected to follow the rules.

Applying Group (continued)

As a primary group we have these dynamics;ExpectationsLeadershipAttraction

NormsCommunicationCohesiveness

In short we were like the communities for whom the group CISM model was created.


Once we got our hands around the concept that we were in a CISM event of a continuing and escalating reality, with the eventual shutdown of the airline, we were able to move past the first line on page 1 of part 1 in the ALPA CIRP Manual dated 12/97, which states; “Aviation accidents and incidents are events that may evoke great distress for those involved.”We were not in an accident, we are in a disaster!


By no means are we trying to slight the foresight of those who created the ALPA model. The scope of ALPA CIRP listed on page 2-9 of the ALPA CIRP Manual is a good start to a complicated problem. We had to go “outside the box” in order to help complete the task we were given.Another important thing to recognize is that the ALPA CIRP manual does make reference to, and explains, CISD’s and demobilizations, and debriefings.


We strategically planned for the 34 events previously listed using the 5T’s (Target, Type, Timing, Theme, Team) and the increasing concentric circle/bulls eye chart, which represents the epi-center of a crisis situation and the ripple effect that needs varying degrees of CISM services.


It was because of the escalating distractions among our pilot group; the bad news started to become reality, parking airplanes in the desert, an unknown severance package, and mass furloughs looming on the horizon, that preparations for LODD and suicide touched the tip of our spear.It is important to note; while those distractions and a multitude of others weighed heavily on all of us, to date, the air crews have performed admirably and professionally.

727 fleet in Kingman, Arizona

Exodus to Kingman


LODD and suicide, arguably two of the most destructive CISM events a group can face, forced us to look at how we would prepare for them.Both required a strategic approach that met multiple group needs.The ALPA CIRP Manual does a tremendous job in outlining the proper protocols for dealing with a LODD.


Suicide, however, threw us a big curveball. In the ICISF Suicide Prevention/Intervention course, the belief is that, untreated, the backlash of a completed suicide of a coworker can be toxic to the primary group for years after the event.We had such an event in 1997 and did nothing to help those who were close to the individual, as well as the pilot group as a whole.


Last month, at a union sponsored dinner for the pilot’s, there was a slide show presentation representing the faces of our group over the years, and when that person’s picture came up, repressed feelings flowed from many of those who were close to the deceased. 12 years later!Don’t be an Ostrich concerning suicide and CISM work, get in front of the problem.


Within our LODD and suicide models, creating a death notification policy and bereavement model which included Pastoral care, (PCI), became imperative.Drawing from the Military and LE communities, it was apparent that if it is done properly, death notification can start the family down the road to recovery and closure, while not preparing your team for that eventuality will lead to certain long term trauma for both the family and team.


While the model for suicide and LODD are essentially the same, it became apparent to us that it is imperative we put the same amount of effort into providing a high level of CISM services to the suicide event as we do to the LODD.Not doing so can, and will, effect your group for years to come.

Group Conclusions

Group CISM is a much needed, yet underutilized tool. Providing CISM services is a multi dimensional affair. Train your team in group intervention, and drill scenarios. Broaden the scope of your CIRP program, think outside of the “airplane in the ditch” syndrome.Control your protocols, know when to ask for help and be specific in what you require from whom.Plan, plan, plan.

A Thought on Group

In the 90 days post 9/11, the NYPD conducted CMB’s and CISD’s in every precinct for every employee as a requirement to continue working. Being a sworn officer or not had NO bearing on the requirement of attendance. Their feeling was, in the aftermath of the disaster, everyone needed accurate information, and everyone needed to walk though the CISD process.Very progressive, “outside the box” thinking and behavior for the largest armed police force in the world.

Grief and Job Loss

It is well established that job loss leads to grief.Loss is the end of something as we know it. Grief is the process used to reestablish life’s balance.

Grief (continued)

Kubler-Ross 5 stages of grief:1. Denial2. Anger3. Bargaining4. Depression5. Acceptance

Once achieved, other stages can be revisited.Recovery is not a linear progression.

Grief (continued)

John Bowlby’s stages of grief:1. Protest2. Despair3. Reorganization

One must go through despair to get to reorganization.

Challenges of Grief

Grief will accumulate if you don’t work through it.An avalanche effect can occur when a past event’s grief is added on to a present event.

Strategies in Job Loss Grief

Combining one or more of these strategies is important, there is not a single, stand alone strategy.1. Face the Monster. Allow time to feel the grief.2. Rely on your social and professional support

system.3. Engage in non-work activities. (i.e. volunteering,

exercise, etc.)4. Increase you job search activities.5. Distance yourself from the situation.

Job Loss Grief Conclusions

“If you do everything right in the job loss grieving process, is a furlough going to be a good experience? NO…if you were to like it that would be rather odd! Grief is not a shameful, fearful experience, it is the body’s way of righting itself.”

Conclusions

Progressive and supportive MEC leadership is a must. Apolitical committee leadership works well. Mission over motives.Pick your team carefully. Use the ALPA CIRP Manual guidelines. Be prepared for volunteers to drop out, it’s intense work.Train per ALPA standards, but also complete the ICISF core curriculum. (www.icisf.org)

http://www.icisf.org/

Conclusions (continued)

Develop protocols that fit your organization.Think outside the box. Dream it and plan it.Develop an Emergency Response Plan (ERP) for your protocols and try to integrate into the company’s incident command structure so as to better manage the situation.Have a plan for using ALPA National CIRP resources while your team is activated. Know what you need and how you want it deployed. Stay in command and ahead of the situation.


We found group intervention to be a very good tool for the multitude of situations that were facing us. Don’t limit the amount of tools you have in the tool box. Be creative.Look carefully at bereavement and Pastoral Care policies. LODD and suicide models need to be strong, cohesive programs.Plan the drill and drill the plan.


With the ALPA CIRP and ICISF mantra being; “to do no harm”, and applying the definition of CISM, Everly & Mitchell, 1997 &1999, Everly & Langlieb, 2003,as; “A comprehensive, integrated, systematic, and multi-component approach to crisis intervention.”, the question becomes: To what end are we willing mitigate the application of complete CISM services in order to narrow the scope of our mission to those we serve?

This is who we serve. Thank you.

Documents

CIRP/CISM Evolves at ASTAR