Originally Posted by
SteveHobson
T28B, RARA9, HUNTERBOY, 70 MUSTANG
Thank you for your replies and the valid comments that you make which are appreciated.
However, the issue that I raised was the lack of trust between pilots and managements,
and your comments don't really address that aspect. Aren't many airline managers ex pilots?
Do they change their spots when they go into management!!
And how can mutual trust be earned ? Serious question.
I'm one of those guys sitting the back of the aluminium tube, trusting that the pilots up front
are not stressed. Wasn't the stress of the Captain of Trident 'Papa India' a contributory factor
of the deep stall near Staines , with two inexperienced co-pilots?
I also didn't say safety was a gimmick.
I meant that using safety as a means of achieving contractual bargaining rights could be considered a gimmick.
Being responsible for a vessel's safe navigation is not always easy and plane sailing (.... pun intended !)
Many stressful hours are spent on the bridge when navigating in restricted waters without the help of
a sea pilot. e.g Straits of Malacca, Straits of Singapore, English Channel ( .. cross channel ferries putting an
additional stress as they cross the shipping lanes ) ... and many other restricted waters.
Swiss Steve
Steve, it's the death of a thousand cuts.
Let us offer an illustrative example (school book) of how management boils the frog:
Day One, the roster is 230 pilots and FAs for this monthly flight tasking of X. Crew rest and such are adhered to.
Day One Thousand someone wants to save some money, now 210 pilots and FAs are the manning level for the same work load
Day Two Thousand: someone wants to save money, now 190 pilots and FAs are the the manning level for the same work load.
"How little can we get away with paying for personnel?"
Does that answer your question on the lack of trust?
It is this kind of stuff (there are other bits, but this one is easy to illustrate) that unions call out as abusive.
Now for your homework:
Calgon Flight 3407