This unprecedented situation can be viewed as collateral damage from the Air France Flight 447 accident. Not surprisingly, the dispute is escalating, since flight crews and the carrier’s chain of command have long maintained adversarial relations. Further fanning the flames are the difficulties in establishing probable causes for AF447’s June 1 plunge into the Atlantic Ocean during a flight between Rio de Janeiro and Paris.

The French air accident investigation bureau (BEA) still expects to gather enough information to avoid publishing an inconclusive final report. Meanwhile, speculation is growing.

No fewer than four French cockpit-crew unions are involved in the imbroglio, a harmful fragmentation. In fact, the unions are competing for new members while following divergent strategies and incompatible objectives. Instead, they should be speaking with a single voice or, even better, implementing a long-overdue merger.

Nevertheless, all four unions have agreed to reject Air France management’s public posture, which they say is adding to the confusion. Union leaders also assert that managers are trying to cover up weaknesses in pilot training procedures.

At this stage, no one can claim to be bringing the situation under control. This indicates that some procedures involving cruise flight are thought to be flawed or not being applied correctly, with the implication that the AF447 crash could have been the result of inappropriate actions in the cockpit. The pilots consider such an assumption unacceptable.

Clearly, the airline’s leaders have not found the right words to establish a good rapport with the flight crews. On their side, the unions have not submitted workable proposals to promote a more positive mood. In a carefully worded internal letter, Air France operations management last month tried to restore confidence but missed this goal.

Although using conciliatory terms in preparation for discussions once the storm abates, management warned pilots to be more vigilant, disregarded the need for new procedures and instead asserted that it would be sufficient just to adhere to existing rules. This could be interpreted to mean that Air France attributed “safety lapses” to overconfidence. With no specific reference to AF447, management indicated that flight operations are suffering from decreased vigilance.

“Intolerable,” retorted Capt. Erick Derivry, spokesman for France ALPA. (Formerly known as SNPL, the French branch of the Air Line Pilots Assn. is Air France’s leading union.) Other pilots believe that trust has simply evaporated and a management-pilot divorce is underway—not a no-fault divorce but a true breakup.

An 11th-hour initiative, however, is expected to reduce tensions. Air France Chief Executive Pierre-Henri Gourgeon and pilot union leaders finally came to an agreement to quickly form a dedicated safety team of 5-7 veteran pilots. They will report directly to Gourgeon. In addition, Capt. Gilbert Rovetto, senior vice president for operations, is now scheduled to retire next month, “as planned earlier”—an obvious trompe l’oeil to suppress an additional source of strain.

Adopting for the first time a diplomatic tone regarding the AF447 mishap, Gourgeon said: “Nothing indicates that the cockpit crew was at fault. At least, this is my personal belief.” He added that the plan is to review flight safety top-to-bottom.

Whether Gourgeon’s initiative can restore confidence is unclear. BEA and Airbus are also being criticized by some pilots and their friends, who allege that the truth is being withheld in “secret efforts” to protect A330-200 sales. Such accusations are not new and appear frequently after Airbus crashes.

In addition, Henri Marnet-Cornus, a retired pilot, and Francois Nenin, a writer who says he is a flight safety expert, recently completed a “counter-inquiry” on AF447—an effort apparently aimed at undermining the credibility of the investigation team.

The result is a painful, endless mess. Will common sense finally return?