I have several reservations about this idea.
Firstly, as this is a significant change to Ts and Cs where is BALPA's involvement? Capts are clearly going to find themselves called out from SBY far more frequently than before, ie yet more disruption, and to do a job that they are not necessarily trained in or familiar with on a first-hand basis. I find it hard to believe that such a major change can go through without BALPA's involvement in the discussion stage. What is BALPA there for if not to act as a buffer for things like this? Mind you, given BALPA's willingness to sell, or to allow our Ts and Cs to drift away down the orange river perhaps it wouldn't make any difference anyway.
Re trained in or familiar with (above) - Many of our Capts are direct entry and have never sat in this company's RHS. Some may have come from another type (maybe several jobs ago) and have never sat in the RHS on current type, ever. So what suddenly qualifies them to do so?
Recency qualifications. The book says "A pilot cannot act as FO unless he has operated as pilot flying for 3 TOs and landings... in the preceding 90 days". This can only happen (due to the PF requirement) in the sim, unless there is an additional interim check on line with an LTC (which would really bollix the training dept) and is good only for 3 mths. What happens on the next 3 mths? Is this going to be changed? If so by what justification can a restrictive clause like this - which must be there for a reason - be arbitarily scrapped? Has it's raison d'etre somehow changed - apart from sound safety led concerns like convenience to the recruiting/crewing dept? Has someone done a formal risk asessment? If so may we see the data? Has the CAA approved it?
Book also says, re LVPs, "Both Operating pilots must hold a... Cert of Approval". Well as far as I am concerned I am only trained to act in one seat for LVPs. If I can operate in one seat with no recurrent training why is it so important that I am trained to such a high standard in the other? By that logic we should scrap all recurrent LVP training - just bin it! Are the Directors going to stand in front of a court of enquiry and say truthfully that both pilots were fully trained to the required level when one of them might never have carried out a CatIII approach before from the RHS? Or will having a Capt in RHS rule out a Cat III approaches?
And with sim time already so tight on recurrent training what is going to be sacrificed for the token app, GA, SE app and landing? (which doesn't contain the 3 appchs and landings required by the Ops manual for RHS qualification) Something has to slip...Trouble is, if its us that slips (up) its us that will get busted for it...
Whats next? Does this work the other way too, so that line Capts will get rostered for training trips if there is a shortage of LTCs? On the same pay? From the RHS perhaps - after all, we appear to be qualified to operate from there...? Or serve the tea when the No 3 has a cold? Or load the baggage...
No, I'm not preaching demarcation, but just how far can our Ts and Cs be stretched without, apparently, any discussion? Anyway, the safety issue seems to leave a lot of questions unanswered. I would hope that some discussion might take place before this is "rolled out" - is that the correct management w@nkspeak? and we get presented with yet another fait accompli.
Hmm. I hae me doots!
Why, oh why can't the damn beancounters see that just a little effort to make lives easier and less stressful would result in the almost total end to FO wastage due to disillusion with inhumane working practices, and all the associated costs of recruiting and training to replace that wastage, which must cost Millions per annum, would stop. This really is British managerial short-termism taken to the n th degree.
Last edited by Agaricus bisporus; 22nd Aug 2005 at 18:12.