Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Middle East
Reload this Page >

Wall Street Journal article on EK crewing problem.

Middle East Many expats still flying in Knoteetingham. Regional issues can be discussed here.

Wall Street Journal article on EK crewing problem.

Old 12th Apr 2015, 10:03
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For God's sake, if it's safety concerns you're worried about, use the Company provided Confidential Safety Reports. That's what they're there for and management don't get to see your name. It really doesn't get any easier than that!
Harry, sorry, most things you write make sense. This does absolutely not and i would guess you even know it to be somewhat naive.
glofish is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 12:54
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Naive in what sense? I take it you don't trust the Confidential system in the Company. I'm not referring to the GCAA one, but the one in EK. I would like to know why you feel qualified to make that comment as I think that's more ignorance on your part than naivety on mine. I've used the system and it worked for me. Slow, yes, but it did what it was designed to do. There is one filter and it's not management.

Don't knock it until you try it. Sitting back and accepting something's not going to work without at least trying it is just the sort of apathy we as a group should be avoiding, wouldn't you agree? We are, after all, battling for the same goals.

Harry
harry the cod is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 14:36
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UAE
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Harry,

Back in the days of Ed the Talking Horse I sent an e-mail to our safety department. It ended up on AAR's desk, although he wasn't copied in on it. He decided he didn't like the tone of my words and I got hauled into the office.

Things may have changed since those days but it wasn't that long ago and I still don't believe anything in this company is confidential- you may remember not that long ago some of the findings of a "deidentified" LOSA audit were e-mailed out and they included the flight number and the date.

confidential+Emirates=I'll keep quiet thanks.
BigGeordie is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 15:06
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Within
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've sent a complaint to the chairman after I have visited his office. His secretary told me to send it on her email address. I did so and after a while I got a warning email from now former HR manager not to write emails to HH and to communicate only with those whose names are in my termination letter.

So, we can say that everything that happened afterwards is the exclusive mistake of that secretary. She has decided not to forward my email to HH, she notified my managers about it instead and therefore indirectly caused everything that happened afterwards.

One secretary decides whether your letter or complaint is important and she filters everything. This is how stupid it gets inside EK. Nevertheless, this example is the proof that nothing is confidential in EK, that incompetent people decide about it and it is naive to believe that they use the system in any other way than to protect themselves in front of HH, who is, himself, probably unaware of the extent of discontent in his own company.
Nikita81 is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 16:51
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dubai
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What a disgrace that the confidential reporting system is anything but.

But management will no doubt claim that the lack of reports shows there is nothing to hide, rather than the real fact that the entire system is compromised.
Kamelchaser is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 17:02
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Sand Box
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SOPS. Believe the individual to which you refer, also filed an ASR or CSR that implicated him, not the confidential one. As an aside, I congratulate you on your escape, but not sure why you feel the need to stir the pot. Cut the cord man!
Curry Goat is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 18:06
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: universe
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agree with Curry. SOPS, you're sounding like a retiree with too much time on his hands. Do some gardening.
vfenext is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 18:10
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Within
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
497 posts and still sounds like a plain troll.

Last edited by Nikita81; 12th Apr 2015 at 18:38.
Nikita81 is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 19:44
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GYS, the 90+ hrs does include crew rest time (but not ground duties and simulator or time spent on reserve/standby). We also get flight pay for the crew rest time. However, it does not count towards the flight time limitations for 30 days or 365 days.
There is no reference whatsoever to bunk time not counting towards those hours. However, our bosses claim that because the OMA is signed off by the GCAA, everything that is in there is "legal". I'm not a lawyer, but something doesn't smell right. EK knows it, the GCAA knows it but as they both have the same boss, nothing will change. Only pressure from other legislators might do, but don't hold your breath....


Geordie and VLS, thanks for the info.
These rules appear to me as plain illegal.
I would think this is good ammo for an article as well. Have not read anything about that before.
Unbelievable, that EASA and FAA allow such tricks. Is there any US or EU airline around that does the same?

Last edited by golfyankeesierra; 12th Apr 2015 at 19:55.
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 19:50
  #50 (permalink)  
Kapitanleutnant
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I've heard that when the EASA rules come into effect in July, that factoring will be a thing of the past. But, somehow, someway EK will find a way to "interpret" a paragraph which completely allows them to do it a bit sneakier than any other airline… and probably get away with it!

K
 
Old 12th Apr 2015, 19:56
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ah, so that is meant by "factoring".
Read the term before but didn't understand the meaning.
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2015, 23:57
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: dxb
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As far as I can find, EASA ftl have 1000 hrs in 12 months...

Last edited by VLS with ice; 13th Apr 2015 at 00:29.
VLS with ice is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 00:00
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: dxb
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ORO.FTL.210 Flight times and duty periods

(a) The total duty periods to which a crew member may be assigned shall not exceed:

(1) 60 duty hours in any 7 consecutive days;

(2) 110 duty hours in any 14 consecutive days; and

(3) 190 duty hours in any 28 consecutive days, spread as evenly as practicable throughout that period.

(b) The total flight time of the sectors on which an individual crew member is assigned as an operating crew member shall not exceed:

(1) 100 hours of flight time in any 28 consecutive days;

(2) 900 hours of flight time in any calendar year; and

(3) 1 000 hours of flight time in any 12 consecutive calendar months.

(c) Post-flight duty shall count as duty period. The operator shall specify in its operations manual the minimum time period for post-flight duties.


Definition of operating crew: operating crew member” means a crew member carrying out duties in an aircraft during a sector

So as far as I understand, bunk time is included.
VLS with ice is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 05:54
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Varies!
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whilst I can understand the reluctance of some to trust any system, there is a huge difference between sending an open letter to Flight Safety and using the CSR system. This system is for cabin crew and pilots, not ground staff (Nikita!)

The airline is required to have a Confidential Safety Reporting system and regardless of what we think of the current management or the culture within the organisation, they too are aware of it's importance. It takes a long while to build up trust and seconds to destroy it. Posting our opinions is fine. Posting that a system doesn't work when you haven't tried it is ignorant. I would not trust writing a letter to AAR via his invitation but I would, however, recommend voicing safety concerns through the correct confidential channel. At least you have recourse should the process fail. You don't through an open system.

The Company could only access the reporters details through the facilitator so unless you don't trust them, I can't see how your details can be released to management. It would need only one person to highlight this shortcoming for it to blow the whole process out of the water. In the last 5-7 years, I've not heard of that and would not expect it anyway.

I think it's about time some people took more ownership of their problems. The forms are on the aircraft ladies and gents, start using them!
BYMONEK is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 06:28
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BYMONEK, I'm glad you have pointed out how we all I'm sure hope the confidential reporting system works.
Speaking hypothetically for a moment, and when I say hypothetically I mean it in the literal sense as well as what was conveyed to me by way of a colleagues opinion.
Whose to say for example that the facilitator is put under pressure to reveal details? are there checks and balances? is the information contained secure and free from external influence? Given the level of hypocracy and collective arse covering/nepotism displayed in various departments, how can we be sure that pressure wouldn't be bought to bear on the individual facilitator? Yes it it most certainly a question of trust and integrity, but it is also a fact that those who have been identified previously have been punished. Is the facilitator above influence/coercion, or are they merely an unwitting yet genuine player in another initiative that is merely paying lip service to the very real benefits of confidential safety reporting? How can we be sure that tomorrow, next week or next year there won't be a decree that forces the system to now identify those individuals on the grounds of "whatevertheyfeckinglike".
If any of that can be REASONABLY assured, then I'm certain more reports would be forthcoming.
Not my thoughts as I say, but an opinion expressed to me by a senior individual recently which to be frank is quite troubling to my sensitive trusting soul.
falconeasydriver is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 06:42
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
EASA Flight Time Limitations have been delayed until Feb 2016.

1000 hrs ultimate limit, no factoring of bunk time.

Whether the GCAA adopt EASA FTLs is an entirely different matter...
Mr Good Cat is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 06:54
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
http://www.slideshare.net/garretheal...6-module-1-v12

The new EASA FTLs.

Have a look at the definition of Class 1 In-flight rest areas. That's quite interesting - "Free from passenger noise and disturbance".
Mr Good Cat is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 08:00
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
VLS with ice, your post #34 regarding GCAA flight time limitations is correct, BUT a Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) was made by the GCAA last year for CAR OPS 1 and was open for comments on 24 November 2014 with only 30 days to submit a response. The document is 513 pages long with quite a few changes.

The current CAR OPS 1 dated Feb 2014 on page 272 states what VLS says and is correct. However the new CAR OPS 1 NPA valid soon and ambiguous as to exactly when (look under NPA on GCAA website), page 288 makes ones eyes water and I’m sure the people in the bouncy castle are celebrating big on this one, there are three additional new notes in this amendment and Note 3 is the killer for cumulative fatigue in my humble opinion. New CAR-OPS 1, 1.1125 Absolute limit on flying hours Note 3 states;
A crew member is not considered operating crew member, during the time spent at his/her rest in an acceptable in-flight rest facility, or its equivalent under unforeseen circumstances, which will be reported to the GCAA. The duration of the flight rest time is not to be included in the flight time cumulative limits, but will be included in the Flight Duty Period Duty time for cumulative limits consideration.

As it goes the UAE airlines can say that they simply follow the regulator, but in reality the regulator is being driven by who?? I will leave that one to your imagination. Certain airlines in the ME have regularly been using the limit as a target plus a bit of dubious fudge factoring here and there as it suits. I personally don’t think any sane reputable medical professional that understands cumulative fatigue would recommend flying to these limits continuously as part of your career given the wide variable schedule we have nowadays. But then again you can always leave if you don’t like it.
positive stability is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 08:29
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Within
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Whilst I can understand the reluctance of some to trust any system, there is a huge difference between sending an open letter to Flight Safety and using the CSR system. This system is for cabin crew and pilots, not ground staff (Nikita!)
True. Nevertheless, behaviors and intentions are the same.

Same happened when I sent complaint on harassment at workplace to HR (which should be one of the most confidential things in HR). The person I complained on (DVP Anoma Manuel) was informed about it and I was fired almost immediately (nobody replied on my complaint until many days later when it was obvious that I will not give up). Just another example.
Nikita81 is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2015, 08:56
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In the seat
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Positive stability, very observant post. Not that the regs you are referring to differentiate between Block hours and cumulative duty hours. Rest is not recognised for cumulative duty but the block hours count, which remain at 900, the cumulative duty hours are 2000, but these have to include online learning etc!!
kingpost is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.