Working directive for engineers

[winglit]

I once stumbled across a document that gave the suggested working week for licensed engineers, but now I can't find it.

I'm looking for something that says that you can't be expected to work seven days a week continuously, without any planned days off.

The job in question only takes between three to five hours each day (an ETOPS transit), but the expectation is to plod along and do it indefinitely as a full time contract covering at least one flight a day, seven days a week.

Can anyone point me to a document that might show management that this is not an acceptable working practice? As far as I'm aware it's not illegal, but I think it goes against CAA/EASA recommendations.

Cheers

[Genghis the Engineer]

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Bombardier%20DHC-8-102,%20SX-BIO%2006-11.pdf

Refers to most of the relevant regulations and best practice documents.

G

[Plore]

You work for EK? Sounds like it :}

[WenWe]

You make your bed...................

[boeing_eng]

A real can of worms this one!.......If OT is there many will work it for obvious reasons:}

The crux of the current situation is that all the working hours regulations are nothing more than recommendations with most choosing to ignore via the opt out clause. Unfortunately, it's a fact that many MRO's and Airlines could not operate without Engineers working OT. If the rules below were rigidly enforced there would be a lot of trouble! (which clearly shouldn't be the case!)


According to ‘The Working Time Regulations 1998’ and ‘The Working Time (Amendment) Regulations 2003’5, an employer should ensure that a worker does not work in excess of an average of 48 hours per week over a 17-week period. In the 1998 regulations the air industry was excluded from this rule, but in 2003 this air industry exclusion was removed. However, the 48‑hour limit does not apply if a worker has agreed with his employer, in writing, that it should not apply in his case. 97% of engineers at the AMO, including Sup A, had signed an ‘opt-out’ agreement so that the 48-hour limit would not apply to them.

[boeing_eng]

Safety Concerns....As usual I see you have managed to stoop to your normal quality of postings!:mad: On the subject of real prostitution, what about the newly qualified FO's who are actually paying certain airlines serious money to sit in the R/H seat to build time!?

No one in this industry will I'm sure pretend that the current situation with regard to working hours is ideal. However, face facts!....nothing will change until the regulator actually mandates the maximum hours we can work. Will this happen?......what do you think!?:ugh:

Its not just a problem in this industry too!! As I said in my post yesterday, if OT is there, human nature dictates there will be those who work it!

[Alber Ratman]

Certain companies i know only allow 60 hours per week / 6 days per week maximum.. Others I've seen 77 hours + anything more they can get.. and crew chiefs earning 6 figure pay packets cos they live at work..:E

[spannersatcx]

We are not allowed to do shifts any longer than 12 hours, except in an AOG situation when we can only work a max of 16 and then have an 11 hour break, we can not work more than 7 days without a rest day.

And yes I have walked away from an AOG at the 16 hour point and come back the next day, you have to have the courage of your convictions and an employer that will support you helps.

So you see some are more regulated than others, the problem is with employers who have no concept of human factors or health and safety.

Therefore do not tar everyone with the same brush. Some employers do actually care.

[Krystal n chips]

" I read this and can only shake my head. You put in print what a bunch of fools you engineers really are."

Unlike your statement ( I can be, and have been, called many things, but take exception to fool.... in a working capacity ) a polite question.

What is your occupation, your experience in aircraft maintenance and your basis for making such an asinine observation....please.

True, I no longer work in the airline world, but I do work in another area of aviation with live aircraft....but I did my share of o/t when I was so employed plus AOG's...how about yourself ?.

[Alber Ratman]

Yeah, Safety Corcerns... What do you do?:eek:

[Rigga]

While SC's poorly written sentiments are correct, in that people will need to be restrained from working all the hours they can whilst at the same time possibly jeopardising those they should be trying to protect from accidents, the reality of cost and maintenance manpower will rule until such time as a mandated Working Time Directive is put in place. This cannot be done for UK alone and must be a world-wide directive to protect cost sensitivities and certainly the UK's safety record.

However bad some may portray our safety status, I believe the UK is still only second to the US. (but we should also remember that we used to be first.)

[boeing_eng]

Folks...Have a look at Safety Concerns posting history....Says it all!!:ugh:

[Rigga]

There is no doubting that some engineers are, or can be, stupid - in the same way that some "Quality" personnel (me included) can be accused of being shut up in ivory towers for too long and develop a sense of wellbeing by dictating what should be done through e-mails, megaphones and publications that most shop floor's have ceased to read many years ago.

There is nothing like a practical way to prevent someone doing something and writing posters isn't always the way to do it.

AD's were purely introduced to mandate the acceptable (not always correct) way to manage something. Laws do the same. And if ICAO, FAA, EASA, the blessed CAA or even Commerce cannot see the safety issues in not enforcing this as they have done for the drivers of aeroplanes and HGV's, then why should anyone volunteer to reduce their incomes to placate this seemingly weak proposal?

[boeing_eng]

Safety Concerns………..Do yourself a favour as others have suggested and kindly moderate your language! You are simply coming across as a bigoted keyboard coward happy to spout off in all directions!:ugh: Also, is there a hint of jealously here!?....After all, you found it hard to accept what an LAE mentioned he was earning with OT in the thread about salaries a few weeks ago!:}:}:}

[Avionker]

Read the original post Safety Concerns.

The job in question only takes between three to five hours each day (an ETOPS transit), but the expectation is to plod along and do it indefinitely as a full time contract covering at least one flight a day, seven days a week.

Do the arithmetic and tell me how opting out off the WD would prevent this situation arising.

In case you are curious, yes I do opt out all the time. As a contractor I am expected to do long hours, I have no problem with it as I don't normally work for months on end, just a few weeks. I know my personal limits and will say no to excessive overtime, I have no intention of working myself into the grave and am also aware of the effects of fatigue on performance.

I object to being called stupid and suggest that you moderate your language and stop making such sweeping statements.

Incidentally don't forget that the only reason you have a job is because of people on the shop floor, actually doing the work that allows the company to turn a profit.

[Krystal n chips]

" have had a very long and successful career in quality for those trying to deflect from the real issue of engineer stupidity "

The real issue is your complete inability to communicate and I would venture to suggest this is equally applicable in your inter-personal skills when at work.

There are common strands in your posts that imply you feel you always know best and are never wrong.

In aviation, this makes you a potentially very high risk flight safety hazard.....although it is unlikely you would even begin to understand why.

Your response ( as underlined above ) is interesting therefore and which leads to the question(s)...which discipline are you ?.....is this career path wholly within aviation...and how did you start your career ?

I only ask because I think we would all like to know how, and why, you feel your arrogance and denegratory comments about engineers has arisen from your own experience and which seemingly makes you the defining authority on any subject..in contrast to mere mortals on here...like myself for example.

[IJustPhixem]

Safety Concerns you are making your assumption on the basis that the overtime is always wanted by the engineers, plenty of places I have been it's the management twisting the engineers arm as they have no cover, a/c late off check etc. Perhaps if the QA dept's looked at the shift/ station cover on their annual audits and addressed it then the overtime would decline but that would require them to put their neck on the block which rarely seems to happen these days.

Things are rarely are simple as they seem.

[woptb]

Safety Concerns, as a 'Quality' person (I use the expression guardedly!),is this a discussion about safety or money? What’s your organisations policy on opting out & fatigue management?
With many (all?) organisations the opt out form is filled in during your probationary period. Yes some people are greedy, but no more so than any other industry. Fear plays a part, people like to keep their job!
Your naive if you believe that guidelines or recommendations do any good or that all people who sign the opt out are gutless. Until the regulators 'grow a pair' and come up with a mandated set of regulations for maintainers fatigue management, the situation will continue, exacerbated by the economic climate.
It can’t be about money as all you Quality guys earn a fortune! If it’s not the case, would you like any vinegar?

[Rigga]

Because the WTD has an Opt-Out it cannot be a "Law" - it can only be an optional practice.

And it is a optional practice because no-one (business managers/management) in the aviation industry wants maintenance working hours to be made an enforceable "Law".

Btw, I'm on salary so it wont affect my more-than-enough hours!

[Avionker]

Anything further to add Safety Concerns?

[TURIN]

SC

97% refers to that particular employer only. If what I hear through the grapevine is true then they would not have had much choice. :suspect:

My own circumstances a very different (thank the gods) and as far as I know no one who works where I do has opted out of the WTD.

So please when you refer to stupidity of engineers can you be more specific as one or two of us are getting a bit peeved with your general outburst.

Regards,

T (37.5 hrs/week & no overtime for months:{)

[spannerhead]

The figure of 97% is brought up time and time again. 97% is one hell of a huge majority........Think why. Because 97% of engineers are not stupid! By voting to opt out it gives the individual a choice to work long hours or to only work a standard shift. An employer can only ask, not force an employee to work excessive hours. The choice is therefore yours and you have the freedom to make the decision yourself rather than be regulated. Nice position to be in!

[Avionker]

I actually meant anything constructive to add, not just repeating previous insults.

Now try reading this quote from the original post:-

I'm looking for something that says that you can't be expected to work seven days a week continuously, without any planned days off.


This is what the original post was about. Yet you chose to launch into a vitriolic and unprovoked attack on a large group of people, for some unknown reason.

Now can you, or can you not, answer the question posed by the OP?

If so then please do, if not then kindly shut up. I'm sure I'm not the only one sick of your jaundiced views.

[spannersatcx]

Rest break rules for the UK anyway (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/WorkingHoursAndTimeOff/DG_10029451)

[Avionker]

For the love of god man, read what people are writing, not what you want to read......

Who is complaining about working more than 48 hours a week? No one that I can see...

The OP wanted to know if he could, or should, be expected to work 7 days a week, between 3 and 5 hours a day, on a continuous basis.

That is between 21 and 35 hours a week. The WTD will not prevent him from doing this, so why in the hell are you so fixated on it?

[Krystal n chips]

" Stop pretending you are intelligent, you ain't "

And that comment alone from you would confirm, that, you are indeed a serious flight safety hazard.

[Avionker]

And these UK regs apply to the Op how? I notice he gives his location as the Carribean. Any chance you could reply to this question with out insulting anyone?

[boeing_eng]

Time to stop feeding the troll me thinks!:(:(

[TURIN]

The figure of 97% is brought up time and time again. 97% is one hell of a huge majority........Think why. Because 97% of engineers are not stupid! By voting to opt out it gives the individual a choice to work long hours or to only work a standard shift. An employer can only ask, not force an employee to work excessive hours. The choice is therefore yours and you have the freedom to make the decision yourself rather than be regulated. Nice position to be in!

I'm going to have to disagree there.

The WTD gives the employee protection from an overbearing employer. Opting out gives the employer carte blanche.

Besides, if you average out 48 hrs over 17 weeks it's quite easy to slip in a few doublers if your normal week is 35 or 40 hrs.


SC, give it a rest eh. We get it. some people are their own worst enemies and will work all the hours they can regardless of their own health/fatigue condition. Yes they are 'stupid' but please do not tar us all with the same brush.

[Safety Concerns]

ok Turin I will because I respect the honesty in your last post.

Turin sums it up nicely and I will now drop it.

[Kuchan]

CAA Paper 2002/06: Work Hours of Aircraft Maintenance Personnel

CAA Paper 2002/06: Work Hours of Aircraft Maintenance Personnel | Publications | CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=628)

The EC WTD is enacted in the UK through the Working Time Regulations (WTR). The WTR contains an 'opt out' clause. This clause permits a work pattern of more than 48 hours in any one week but only if an average of less than 48hours/week can be achieved over a 17-week period. Working in excess of this is not permitted for any employees, either permanent or contracted staff.

As long as LAE is working within the rule, it is lawful.

To call LAE stupidity is to lower your integrity gaining no respect from any one.

[Safety Concerns]

kuchan get your facts right before trying to come across as intelligent.

Example of opt-out agreement
I [name] agree that I may work for more than an average of 48 hours a week. If I change my mind, I will give my employer [amount of time - up to three months] notice in writing to end this agreement.
Signed……....................................
Dated………..................................

The opt out is to enable you to work as much as you wish. That means NO LIMITS on the hours worked.

[Avionker]

What is so hard about disagreeing with someone, without calling them stupid?

[itsresidualmate]

As a contractor I find it most irritating that there are only 24 hours in each day. Can EASA not do something about this?

...and my timesheet only has space for 7 days per week..

[Avionker]

It's easy to let it go. Stop calling people stupid, just because they don't see the world as you do. Accept that people are individuals. Some engineers want hours regulated, some maybe don't. Some people are greedy some are not.

I don't necessarily disagree with everything you say, but I do disagree with your sweeping statements, generalisations and "holier then thou" attitude.

You come on the Engineers and Technicians forum, insult the entire group of people for whom this forum exists, not really the best way to get your point across in my opinion.

[Safety Concerns]

@avionker

I agree with that

@itsresidualmate

I agree with that

[Litebulbs]

kuchan get your facts right before trying to come across as intelligent. The opt out is to enable you to work as much as you wish. That means NO LIMITS on the hours worked.

From this months CHIRP -

The EC WTD is enacted in the UK through the Working Time Regulations (WTR). The WTR contains an 'opt out' clause. This clause permits a work pattern of more than 48 hours in any one week but only if an average of less than 48hours/week can be achieved over a 17-week period. Working in excess of this is not permitted for any employees, either permanent or contracted staff.

Individuals over 18 years of age, who wish to work more than 48 hours a week can choose to opt out of the WTR 48-hour limit; however, this must be voluntary, on an individual basis and in writing unless it has been negotiated as a joint agreement with the whole workforce under the WTR. An individual can cancel the 'opt out' whenever they want, even if it is part of an employment contract, however, the employer must be given advance notice of this intent and depending on the contractual obligation this period will be a minimum of 7 days but could be up to three months.

For individuals who are contracted to work for more than one employer, the total combined hours worked should not exceed the 48-hour average limit.

It should be noted that there are specific provisions in the WTR for night and shift working that also need to be taken into account.

The responsibility for ensuring compliance with the WTR rests with the Health and Safety Executive not the CAA; however, the working pattern described in this report is also contrary to CAA guidance on shift working practices (CAA Paper 2002/06).

As I see that, you can work more than 48 hrs a week, but you cannot opt out of the 17 week average.

[Flightmech]

I get the distinct feeling Safety Concerns actually works somewhere in Operations:E

[Kuchan]

The responsibility for ensuring compliance with the WTR rests with the Health and Safety Executive not the CAA, but a robust internal quality and safety oversight process must also be considered to be fundamental to CAA.

The CAA Regional Office is responsible for reinforcement of the company management the requirements necessary for the re-issue of an AOC should the company repeatedly ignore any warning.

[winglit]

Looks like I've opened up a right can of worms here!

To add a little more light on my query I will give a little more detail of the circumstances I found myself in.

Until quite recently I was an overseas engineer for a UK based charter airline covering turn rounds in the Caribbean. Actually it was the dream job, but as most good things, they do come to an end!

Unfortunately the airline in question has started to reduce it's long haul fleet and operations and I have been made redundant. In the five years I have been out here I have made the Caribbean my home, and for obvious reasons I do not wish to return to the UK.

I was approached by one of my third party customers (German) to come and work for them. Although it was in the same country, it would have meant a relocation to the other side of the island.

They sent me their prospective flying program which was when I noticed that they had planned flights seven days a week. When i queried this they acknowledged this but still expected me to run their operation out here on my own without a day off.

When I asked them when I would get a day off, they said that they would send out a relief engineer when I want to take leave.

This is when I posted my query to see if what this German company is expecting me to do is against any recommendations from any of the authorities. I am aware that my weekly hours would not exceed 48hrs, but what about a day off?

[spannersatcx]

Bit of a catch 22, living in paradise but no time off!
Many years a go we used to handle Air Jamaica and one of the stipulations was on the amount of rest we had had before working on their a/c, so clearly in the Carribean there are regulations, but which are you governed by, local or the airlines?

Could you not get somebody else to do the odd transit once a week, I mean somebody like VS or one of the other airlines, it would involve a contract and some payment of course.

At the end of the day what the airline is asking you to do is not legal from the EASA side of things within the directive as that is what they are goverened by.

Any way what happens when you go AOG, spend 16 hours trying to sort it then the next 5 hour transit turns up.

How do you maintain ETOPS when on your own, some things require independant inspections, a pilot can only do some things!

You need to talk to the airline.

[Tempus]

Safety Concerns in one of your post you say that we only have to say NO. Well i can tell you that in some companies that doesnt work like that, at least in mine it doesnt work like that.

When we start on the company we have to spent 3 years on contracts before we pass to the company boards and if you say No to many times you can guess what happens if you are on contracts and if you are already in the boards you end up suffering reprisals in a way or another.