Social impacts

The social impacts of the presence of a universal requirement to demonstrate proficiency in order to obtain the endorsement of one's professional licence vary greatly and reflect both varying levels of fluency in the language in different parts of the world and also profound political and cultural differences. In the framework of the present paper, there is only space to refer to a few instances as illustrations of the way in which this unique testing environment affects social behaviour.

Airline captains in particular enjoy considerable status both in society in general and more specifically in their professional environment where their authority over the rest of the crew is considerable. In certain Eastern cultures especially, the distance between captain and first officer (co-pilot) can be extreme, with it being difficult for the junior pilot to question his senior at all. Indeed, much effort is currently being deployed in human factors and Crew Resource Management training to make crews more aware of the potentially dangerous consequences of insufficient interaction between the two pilots. Therefore, a testing system which may suddenly upset this balance of authority by threatening the licence of the senior pilot, whose grasp of English may well be less robust than that of the junior first officer, can be very destabilising indeed.

Moreover, in certain cultures, failure is not perceived as an option in high-profile professions exposed to the international gaze. Hence the results of certain benchmark tests in one country have been published with a 99.5% pass rate. Similarly, in another country all the questions in the test approved by the Authorities have been posted on the internet for candidates to become familiar with them thus seriously undermining the validity of the results in both cases. It becomes apparent that the testing systems approved by the national Authorities are subjected to intense social and political pressure.

The conditions of compliance with ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements stipulate that States are obliged to file a difference with ICAO if they fail to comply and inform all those States to which their aircraft fly or over whose territory their aircraft fly of their failure to reach Level 4 entirely. Furthermore, language proficiency is henceforth one of the items which are addressed by ICAO safety audits when their officials visit different States. These facts all result in the language proficiency issue becoming a particularly public one. When communication broke down between a Far Eastern flight crew and an American controller late in 2007 it made the headlines on CNN and elsewhere. In the resulting investigation, it appeared that the crew members had been attributed Level 4 and yet in the ensuing interviews it was painfully clear that their communicative ability was far below this.

Airlines are commonly the flag carriers of their respective States and as such carry considerable prestige. The thought that their reputation could be tarnished by the negative publicity of having some of their staff declared non-compliant with the Language Proficiency Requirements can understandably generate great anxiety and threaten national pride. This in turn may lead to pressure to design or adopt a testing system in which failure is marginalised or results tampered with.

Consequently, in a testing process in which the stakes are so high from many points of view rigorous security is a paramount, but not inviolable, issue.

In other countries, labour laws or strong trade unions may prevent dismissal or reclassification and characterise as discrimination the testing and sanctioning of professionals hired at a time when language requirements were not in force. This in turn may result in either testing being disregarded or the unrealistic training of more senior staff.

Finally, on a more personal level, failure or the fear of failure in a language proficiency test, which determines them practising their profession and maintaining their livelihood, may affect the self-esteem of otherwise highly qualified and respected professionals in their thirties, forties or fifties. This adds to the anxiety experienced in professions already characterized by regular medical check-ups and professional checks.

Поиск по сайту: