Commercial Fixed Wing
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Communication Breakdown; Other / Unknown
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Company Policy; Aircraft; Human Factors
After pushing off gate and starting 1 engine; we received an Elevator Servo Fault ECAM message. We went through all QRH procedures to resolve the problem to no avail. After calling ZZZ Operations to coordinate a return to the gate; we were informed that we were not allowed to return to the gate for a maintenance problem without Maintenance Control authorization. This seems to be in conflict with 14 CFR 121.533; 14 CFR 121.535 regarding Captain's Pilot in Command authority; as well as the MEL preamble which states that Maintenance Control's role is that of technical consultation (Not Command and Control). In any event; we eventually reached Maintenance Control via personal cellphone; and; eventually; Maintenance Control concurred that we should return to the gate. We returned to the gate; maintenance personnel troubleshot the problem to no avail; and the aircraft was taken out of service. My concern is that; in this scenario; the flight crew was forced to go through a Maintenance Control process that has 3 possible outcomes. First; Maintenance Control directs some off book procedure over the phone that 'fixes' the problem. Second; Maintenance Control directs us to flight crew placard the malfunction (which is not allowed by the MEL in any event). Neither one of those outcomes are acceptable with a primary flight control malfunction. The last possible outcome; and the only realistic outcome; is to return the aircraft to the gate; which we were frustrated from doing by this Maintenance Control permission regimen. I am concerned we are being pushed into possibly unsafe operation as our judgment is automatically questioned by a corporate policy that directly conflicts with Federal law.[Reporter stated the need for a revision of] company policy regarding maintenance troubleshooting.We [flight crews] need clearer understanding of the roles and responsibilities of Maintenance Control versus the PIC.
Air carrier Captain reported ground gate return policy violates FARs in regards to Captain's Pilot in Command authority.