Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Other / Unknown; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Manuals; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Aircraft
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Lead Mechanic X dispatched me to a B757-200 aircraft to recover a lost earring in [a First Class] passenger seat while one of the mechanics assigned to the aircraft worked a fuel problem on another airplane. The 2nd Mechanic assigned to this aircraft started the ETOPS walkaround. When I entered the cockpit to discuss the lost earring with the flight crew; I noticed moisture ingress in the R-3 (Right) window. This condition is cause for immediate window replacement per B757 Maintenance Manual (M/M) 56-11-00. Afterwards; I was informed by Lead Mechanic X that he and I were going to a hearing for the moisture ingress discovery. He; for assigning me to the lost earring and I; for noticing the moisture ingress. The hearing will be conducted by Supervisor X; who is livid that I wrote-up the moisture ingress. It appears the Supervisor prefers that I ignore obvious defects on airplanes. Supervisor X [should] be instructed in FARs.

Callback: Reporter stated that B757 aircraft have a history of 'Moisture Ingress' in cockpit windows. At that time of his report; R-3 windows had a 'No-Go' limit for any signs of moisture ingress. R-3 windows are acrylic; not an impact resistant type window and are heated to prevent condensation inside the cockpit. Moisture provides a path for electrical arcing and window fires. The flight was canceled. His Air Carrier charged him with 'failing to prevent a delay' because they believe he was looking for a reason to 'ground an aircraft'.Reporter stated their Company Engineering recently changed the language in the 'Limits' section for cockpit windows regarding moisture ingress that said: 'Must be changed' to read 'Recommended to be changed'. He believes the language change will result in windows that should be replaced; won't be.Reporter stated that over time; a company culture changes the individual; at the management level and in the mechanics group from internal pressures. As a result; work ethics are going to change. His frustration in recognizing the culmination of all the Maintenance errors is the embarrassment of unsafe issues continuing to exist on their aircraft with an unwritten culture of internal pressure on mechanics to 'look the other way'.



Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports; that after noticing an R-3 (Right) cockpit window had moisture ingress on a B757-200 ETOPS aircraft which resulted in a flight cancellation; he was charged with failing to prevent a delay.