Is there a maximum number of passengers per cabin crew
Paxing All Over The World
Phileas Fogg I'm wondering if legacy carriers are streamling their short and long haul fleets. So that, they might be using one type around europe, say, and one or types of the same range for everything else. One might have A319 or 320 and then 330/340 or 350. For example. It's a guess, but one based on 38 years observation of commerce.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PAXboy,
I used to commute significantly in/out of BHX.
With LH it might have been a CRJ to DUS, a BAe146 to MUC and an Airbus or Boeing to FRA.
With LX it might have been a BAE146 to ZRH, a BAe146 ZRH/MXP yet an A320/321 ZRH/FCO.
With KL, something like 5 services a day, it could have been a F70, a F100 or one of two varieties of B737.
These are just examples of different sizes for different niche routes, try and put an Airbus, Boeing or larger Embraer etc. on everything then some routes simply wouldn't work.
I used to commute significantly in/out of BHX.
With LH it might have been a CRJ to DUS, a BAe146 to MUC and an Airbus or Boeing to FRA.
With LX it might have been a BAE146 to ZRH, a BAe146 ZRH/MXP yet an A320/321 ZRH/FCO.
With KL, something like 5 services a day, it could have been a F70, a F100 or one of two varieties of B737.
These are just examples of different sizes for different niche routes, try and put an Airbus, Boeing or larger Embraer etc. on everything then some routes simply wouldn't work.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was on Air Transat YYZ to LGW on 1/9 when we were delayed for 25 minutes or so during which one CC left the flight. Her section colleague told us the MAN flight, leaving 45 minutes later, was two CC down and would not be able to take off unless there was a move over. Thus, two flights left each one CC short but still compliant apparently.
Gender Faculty Specialist
YYZ is an Air Transat base.
It is common on long haul flights to carry more than minimum crew. I'd suggest that in this case TB's flight had at least one extra crew member who could be spared for the other flight ensuring that they both left with at least the minimum.
No flight would have left short of crew.
And it is crew per fifty seats not per fifty passengers.
It is common on long haul flights to carry more than minimum crew. I'd suggest that in this case TB's flight had at least one extra crew member who could be spared for the other flight ensuring that they both left with at least the minimum.
No flight would have left short of crew.
And it is crew per fifty seats not per fifty passengers.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the normal requirement, yes.
But, in my Airline, in the case of operating with reduced crew it is the passenger numbers which count NOT seats.
So in a 180 seater with one crew down, we can only carry 150 pax.
But, in my Airline, in the case of operating with reduced crew it is the passenger numbers which count NOT seats.
So in a 180 seater with one crew down, we can only carry 150 pax.
Gender Faculty Specialist
The wording may well vary but the restriction is based on the actual number of seats per cabin crew as it is in the fully crewed case.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: North
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
easyflyer83 was absolutely correct. Procedure is that if you are operating with minimum crew (A320 that is 4) and, for whatever reason, you have to depart a non-crew base station with 'reduced crew' then the passenger figure for the A320 and their A319 has to be reduced to 150.
RE: EZY's decision years ago to configure their A319's with 156 seats actually goes back to EZY and Airbus wrongly believing that they could get an A319 with that config certified to be operated by 3 cabin crew if the second overwing exit was adopted. Since then, there was a trial where 6 seats were physically blocked off but long term this was decided against by the airline.
Finally, there seems to be a couple of comments and misconception regarding cabin crew pay. Certainly when I was there, not that long ago, cabin crew pay at easyJet was actually pretty good. A few years ago a full time UK based junior would earn around 23K with a senior between 25K and 28K. Commission would only account for about 3K with some 'Northern' bases earning up to 5K. It's hardly the poorly paid job that some seem to think, certainly in the context that 26K is the average UK salary. The problem these days is that contracts can often be fixed term to start with. Even so, for money the charters and some LCC's are much better paid than the legacies on todays contracts.
RE: EZY's decision years ago to configure their A319's with 156 seats actually goes back to EZY and Airbus wrongly believing that they could get an A319 with that config certified to be operated by 3 cabin crew if the second overwing exit was adopted. Since then, there was a trial where 6 seats were physically blocked off but long term this was decided against by the airline.
Finally, there seems to be a couple of comments and misconception regarding cabin crew pay. Certainly when I was there, not that long ago, cabin crew pay at easyJet was actually pretty good. A few years ago a full time UK based junior would earn around 23K with a senior between 25K and 28K. Commission would only account for about 3K with some 'Northern' bases earning up to 5K. It's hardly the poorly paid job that some seem to think, certainly in the context that 26K is the average UK salary. The problem these days is that contracts can often be fixed term to start with. Even so, for money the charters and some LCC's are much better paid than the legacies on todays contracts.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you're suggesting to operate a flight with reduced crew, we should remove the physical seats from the aircraft?
Yes, that is the rule in United Kingdom and a few other places I've lived/worked.
Many years ago we had a sick CC member, we thought the rule was bums on seats so we offloaded some pax and operated the flight home with reduced crew, thereafter we learned of our misinterpretation of the rules.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: North
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That rule must has changed then because in that scenario, provided the departure airport isn't a crew base, it is just a reduction of passengers, not seats. It is an exceptional circumstance.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That rule must has changed then because in that scenario, provided the departure airport isn't a crew base, it is just a reduction of passengers, not seats. It is an exceptional circumstance.
The occasion I refered to we operated Y148 B737's and our standard crew was 4 CC, operate flights around Europe and N. Africa with minimum crew then an operator is asking for trouble and in the event of a sickness down route I wouldn't interpret that as exceptional ... that someone got sick!
On the day in question that I refer to we'd had 2 CC go sick, one before departing base and one down route and when we subsequently read the rules there was nothing in them regarding "exceptional circumstances".
Gender Faculty Specialist
The restriction is due to the number of seats per crew member, which is 50, not the number of passengers per crew member.
Total passengers carried may exceed 150.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1580/NPPL%...01%200%200.pdf
(14) On a flight to which this paragraph applies –
(a) there shall, subject to sub-paragraph (b), be
carried not less than one member of the cabin
crew for every 50 or fraction of 50 pa
ssenger seats installed in the aircraft;
(b) the number of members of the cabin crew
calculated in accordance
with sub-paragraph
(a) need not be carried if the CAA has grante
d written permission to the operator to carry
a lesser number on that flight and the opera
tor carries the number specified in that
permission and complies with any other terms and conditions subject to which such
permission is granted.
(a) there shall, subject to sub-paragraph (b), be
carried not less than one member of the cabin
crew for every 50 or fraction of 50 pa
ssenger seats installed in the aircraft;
(b) the number of members of the cabin crew
calculated in accordance
with sub-paragraph
(a) need not be carried if the CAA has grante
d written permission to the operator to carry
a lesser number on that flight and the opera
tor carries the number specified in that
permission and complies with any other terms and conditions subject to which such
permission is granted.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All I can say is that some operators, as mine does, have a specific rule / allowance in the case of sickness of crew down route.
We have a standard of 4 crew.
We can reduce by a maximum 1 crew member but the passenger numbers need to be reduced accordingly and as long as we do not depart from a base.
And no, we don't need to take the screwdriver out and remove any seats...
We have a standard of 4 crew.
We can reduce by a maximum 1 crew member but the passenger numbers need to be reduced accordingly and as long as we do not depart from a base.
And no, we don't need to take the screwdriver out and remove any seats...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ecam,
If your operator has a UK AOC then I would suggest that your operator has misinterpreted the rules as I and my operator once did and/or it has been approved in your Operations Manual by oversight.
Have you actually seen it in black & white in your Ops. Manual? ... Might be an interesting read next time you've got a few minutes!
If your operator has a UK AOC then I would suggest that your operator has misinterpreted the rules as I and my operator once did and/or it has been approved in your Operations Manual by oversight.
Have you actually seen it in black & white in your Ops. Manual? ... Might be an interesting read next time you've got a few minutes!
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Not At Home
Posts: 2,448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know it well and have done it before IAW the OM.
One of the points taken directly:
"The number of passengers is reduced. A maximum of 50 passengers may be carried per cabin crew member (infants not included). "
We have other restrictions such as it must be approved by our Duty Manager. A safety report must be filed. Passengers must be seated in a position where they can adequately the safety demo. We can only reduce by one crew member (than usually required). Etc Etc
It's very very clearly worded to allow us to do it in unforeseen circumstances if we meet certain provisions.
And yup. UK AOC with 230+ aircraft.
One of the points taken directly:
"The number of passengers is reduced. A maximum of 50 passengers may be carried per cabin crew member (infants not included). "
We have other restrictions such as it must be approved by our Duty Manager. A safety report must be filed. Passengers must be seated in a position where they can adequately the safety demo. We can only reduce by one crew member (than usually required). Etc Etc
It's very very clearly worded to allow us to do it in unforeseen circumstances if we meet certain provisions.
And yup. UK AOC with 230+ aircraft.
Gender Faculty Specialist
If EZY (which I assume is the carrier in question) have managed to write a provision in their Ops Manual that allows them to fly with 3 cabin crew "in unforeseen circumstances" and report it via an ASR after the event, that would seem to be a fairly liberal interpretation of the regulation.
Having said that, if the practice didn't have tacit approval from the CAA, presumably EZY would have been pulled up by now.
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Soon to be out of the EU.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see the problem. Normally in 99.99% of ops it's 1 CC per 50 seats. By definition you can have not more than 50 pax. If operating with a reduced crew it's not more than 50 pax. Just that they're a little more spread out. Crew have the ability to rearrange the cabin as they see fit to ensure they can all see the demo. I don't think it's liberal interpretation at all. In normal ops is 50 pax per CC (regs state seats) vs. 50 pax per CC when operating with a reduced crew. No?
You'll have both of doors 2 covered by one FA each. The purser covers both door 1L and 1R. Almost exactly the same as 149 seater 737 that operate every day where two main doors are covered by one FA. So with having potentially one more pax I can't see safety being compromised in any way.
You'll have both of doors 2 covered by one FA each. The purser covers both door 1L and 1R. Almost exactly the same as 149 seater 737 that operate every day where two main doors are covered by one FA. So with having potentially one more pax I can't see safety being compromised in any way.