Latest Orange Hair-brained scheme

[Bang Or West]

Just heard that the latest Orange hair-brained scheme involves ALL Captains being checked for, and rostered when required to fly in, the Right Hand Seat, being paid P2 duty pay as and when this need arises...any truth?

[TwoDots]

Our company's standard policy is that ALL captains are right hand seat checked, and capable of flying right hand seat (PNF only) when rostered.

Money and expenses are as normal.

[Airbubba]

Some of the U.S. outfits I've flown for consider the captains to be FO qualified but it is a bit of a stretch. In any case, if they are used as copilots they get extra pay, not less pay in most ALPA contracts.

[outofsynch]

Nothing mentioned about Fo rates (sector pay) because they cant do it. It will be at full rate or not at all.

The really daft bit is having to be PNF ! Boring day for one and rather tiring day for the other. All for the same money.

Real low cost philosophy paying Captains to do FO job.

[Daysleeper]

The really daft bit is having to be PNF ! Boring day for one and rather tiring day for the other. All for the same money

Why not just swap seats every couple of sectors?

[maxalt]

The really daft bit is having to be PNF ! The really exciting bit is having to do your PC in the RHS!

[Colonel Klink]

Of course, by Captains agreeing or being forced into doing this masks the real problem: FO's are leaving quickly and the Company cannot find enough of them to crew the roster sufficiently. It really is pitiful that every time this airline decides to go "minimum crew" to save money, it ends up costing far more! After nearly 10 years of this, you would think they would learn!!!!

[Alberts Growbag]

Sadly, Captains operating in the RHS has been normal in most of the UK charter airlines for many years.

It is becoming more common in UK airlines by the year as the CAA are too weak to stop the process. easyJet are not being original in their actions only copying what the others are doing.

It is a totally unsafe practice which should never be allowed as the Captains are not line trained or checked in the seat. They can be called to operate on standby having not been in the seat for over a year or two. The only requirement is that they do the mandatory engine failure scenario in the sim every six months...very useful as they are not allowed to fly from the RHS when they are there...unless it's a Cat3 approach when they get to twiddle the autopilot from the wrong side.

When you consider that the CAA have been allowing this for years it is a shamefull concession to commercial pressure as our airline is now, like most, using RHS Captains to make up for the loss of FO's to carriers that don't stoop to such low levels of desparate crewing.

[phoenix son]

Is one being over-simplistic when one says, if the "pressures" of flying for EZY are so bad, LEAVE and go elsewhere? There's plenty of demand for houred Little Boeing/Minibus drivers at the moment...:confused:

One suspects a few months at RYR would soon have you crying for your Orange job back...

[FlapsOne]

There is NO TRUTH whatsoever in the reduced pay rumour. P2 duty pay is nonsense!

The PNF bit is, I believe, a CAA restriction and not EZY's.

[beardy]

Not a high enough profile here for your comments?

Safety and CRM (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=186005)

[Mentaleena]

This has ALWAYS been a procedure at baby!
The pay is unaffected.
We do swap half way through the day.

Alberts Growbag - has got a very important point nailed here!!!
I think it's appaling that I could be expected to do a CATIII from the right hand seat.
I think the operation is unsafe. I haven't sat in the right seat for over 18 months, but could be today!

CAA - You are to BLAME when the next accident occurs!

[arewenearlythereyet?]

First of all, just so as the 'enthusiasts' don't keep clouding the thread, could we use the correct definitions here. Every two crew flight has to have a designated COMMANDER (CMDR). Usually that is the highest ranking pilot, the CAPTAIN (CPT). The FIRST OFFICER or SENIOR FIRST OFFICER (FO or SFO) is usually second in command (although some cabin crew seniors would love to dispute this :rolleyes: ) The CAPTAIN usually sits in the left hand seat (LHS) but doesn't have to. If it's a TRAINING CAPTAIN (not a captain under training) they may sit in the right hand seat (RHS) with an FO who may be upgrading to CPT for example.

In theory, you don't need a CPT on a flight. You could have two FO's as long as one was designated COMMANDER but not likely. So to clarify for the 'enthusiasts', you need two pilots, usually a CPT and an FO with the CPT being in COMMAND. What often confuses some people who are not in the business is that you also have other designations for the roles the pilots have. EITHER pilot will usually take turns it handling the aircraft and is designated 'pilot flying' or 'handling pilot' (PF or HP). The other pilot will assume the 'pilot not flying' or non-handling pilot' (PNF or NHP) role which covers other things like the radio, paperwork etc.

So, the COMMANDER (the or a) CAPTAIN usually sits in the LHS and could be PF or PNF. The SECOND IN COMMAND (an FO or another CAPTAIN) usually sits in the RHS and will either be PF or PNF. In the UK for example, the COMMANDER logs all flight time whether PF or PNF as P1. The SECOND IN COMMAND logs PF time as P1u/s (under supervision) and PNF time as P2. Clear as mud eh?

In the scenarios quoted above, some or all LINE CAPTAINS are checked out in the simulator every six months to operate from the right hand seat (RHS). They have to demonstrate that they can fly a circuit with an engine failure at take-off (EFATO), an approach, go-around and another approach to a landing... successfully. To suggest that these CPT's that occasionally fly in the RHS are dangerous is probably an exaggeration but they certainly aren't proficient. Throw in any number of complications and the situation could turn nastier than most would like. It is just lining up a few more slices of the swiss cheese.

It is of course a sign of poor management if a company is paying SECOND IN COMMANDS a CAPTAINS salary. It is much more profitable if the company employed enough FIRST OFFICERS, usually at around two thirds to a half the salary of CAPTAINS. Most companies employ FIRST OFFICERS with the idea that they are future captains in training. Of course, if they forget to remind themselves of this and keep employing direct entry captains then the first officers tend to get fed up and look for employment elsewhere.

Having two CAPTAINS on the flight deck for normal, non-training, line flying is not ideal and can be the cause of CRM issues. Also, the CAPTAINS acting as SECOND IN COMMAND have to log their PNF time as P2 (assuming it really bothers them at this stage) and any PF time as P1u/s, assuming that the company allows CAPTAINS in the RHS to actually be PF! :bored:

So, in conclusion, it's not illegal to have two LINE CAPTAINS as crew. It's not even unsafe unless things start to go wrong. It just means that less slices of the swiss cheese need to be lined up for an accident to happen. If it only happens occasionally then it's no big deal but if it starts to happen regularly then it is a sign of bad management, poor beancounting and the airlines Flight Ops Inspector should be keeping a close eye on things.

Maybe a sign of the times that there really is a shortage of qualified and experienced pilots and the worm can turn on the beancounters. :=

[Mentaleena]

arewenearlythereyet?

It's not even unsafe unless things start to go wrong. It just means that less slices of the swiss cheese need to be lined up for an accident to happen

IT IS UNSAFE as things can and do go wrong!

[Gary Lager]

Bit overdramatic, Mental - things can and do go wrong with the normal Capt/FO operation sometimes too - is that fundamentally unsafe? Generally, no - because the error traps are in place to stop things that 'go wrong' turning into a catastrophe...and they should still be in place when two captains fly together as well.

It is a good opportunity for those of us to practise flying (or should that be 'non-flying'?) from the RHS - we rarely get much feedback on our operation as Capts apart from the yearly line-check & sim checks, and any professional Captain out there should:

a) welcome the opportunity to learn from one's colleagues and to remind oneself of the duties of an FO,
b) be able to cope with the unusual CRM situation, by recognising the factors involved and compensating for them accordingly.

Anyone who feels they can't do both of the above when required to by their employer, maybe ought to take a REAL objective look at their own approach to CRM and flight deck management, rather than just paying the required lip service to it on their recurrent day with Dr D.

I have operated with other Captains within our operation, and whilst it is frustrating to witness the failing of our crewing system, it really is no big deal.

Brief the other chap accordlingly, take nothing for granted, and enjoy the chance to hear some gossip about other FOs for a change, rather than other Captains!

After all, all those of us in the LHS were once in the RHS, and could be again in the future - the skills of a good co-pilot should be maintained by all of us, regardless of which seat we sit in in our current employment.

[springbok449]

I agree with Klinks response, someone yet again has got the wrong figures...will they get punished ofcourse not...
No one mind helping the company out but this like everything else in EZY will get used and abused a little like the 5/2/5/4 and the 6/3 for that matter...

[Colonel Klink]

Another point well made is that the Captains who fly in the RHS only do the bare modicum of training; this is true even for Training Captains who are so qualified. We do not have time in the simulator for coping with a rapid decompression from the other seat, even though this is more likely than an engine failure!! If there is a lesson to be learnt from the Helios accident, all crew members should be able to cope in whichever seat they are designated because you never know when your other crew member may not be functioning. This is a CRM recipe for disaster and yet again a classic case of the arse-about management that we live with on a daily basis.

[FlapsOne]

Come on Colonel..........say what you mean!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[Max Angle]

This was done to death a few months ago in another thread. At our company any Captain who sits in the RH seat must have done a basic sim. check in that seat (Take-off, eng. fail, SE approach, SE G/A, SE landing) to be qualified. We are only allowed to PNF unless a trainer and I don't find it a problem. It certainly feels a little strange at first but the fact that you are (presumeably) an experienced and capable pilot in the first place (LH seat airline jet etc. etc.) means that you should be able cope easily. It's a sign of poor management, means you get dicked about more and I would just as soon log P1 time instead of P2 but it is not a safety issue in my opinion.

As said before, if you don't feel you can safely be PNF and P2 in the right hand seat of an aircraft on which you are checked out be a Captain you need to have a think about it, your not being asked to do much in comparison to what you normally do.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

I have to disagree with those who are advocating Captains operating in the RHS as PNF. The fact that other airlines do it does not make it right. One of my previous airlines did it too but they allowed the RHS captain to operate from that seat. The disappointing thing is that easyJet has always prided itself on their 'safety' culture and this is clearly a less safe option than having 2 fully trained and current pilots. I have no problem with operating in the RHS as long as I am trained to the same standard as my First Officer normally is.

We all know how rusty we can feel after two weeks leave. It seems totally self-evident to me that if you do one single-engine landing in the sim from the RHS every 6 months then you simply cannot be of the same standard as someone who does it every day. The prime reason for having 2 pilots is to pick up on each other's errors and for one of them to carry on if the other croaks. If you are faced with the pressure of a dead colleague and you have not landed from the seat you are in for years - dare I say that regardless of your past experience you are well on the way to making some serious errors. There are 3 concerns for any airline - safety, safety and safety! Puting partially trained and uncurrent pilots in the aircraft is simply not acceptable and should be stamped on at the earliest opportunity.

[beardy]

I can't believe I have just read this in relation to captains authorised in the RHS operating as PNF.

partially trained and uncurrent pilots

How precious can you be?

For goodness sake it's only a matter of feet away. The perspective is not that different. The switches are all in the same place and it is the same aircraft.

Next you'll be saying that it's too different to be safe to drive an english car on the continent of europe, or even, god forbid, a hire car with the gearstick on the other side.

[skyclamp]

Max Angle, beardy, Gary Lager

Are you happy then? As if we should just accept anything and everything the stupid management throw at us?
Are you defending, accepting, welcoming this unsafe situation?

Take day 6 after a week of bad weather, slots delays, and the rest. Are any of you seriously suggesting that you are SAFE in the RHS? Having spent 5 minutes in the sim in the RHS I kept on hitting my arm on the side continuously and that was just trying to find the throttles.
Given an emergency, factor for age and tiredness you've got to be kidding.

I'm with Colonel Klink!

[Right Way Up]

The switches are all in the same place and it is the same aircraft
Beardy, that is not exactly true. They are not in the same place relative to you. I have sat behind trg capts who have made big mistakes on the overhead panel and they were relatively current in that seat. On the airbus there are certain emergencies that would be a little too interesting in the case of a rhs line capt. One that comes to mind is the avionics smoke checklist.

[Gary Lager]

Yep, happy.

Happy with my ability to operate to the standard of a good FO and PNF in the RHS.

I am intrigued as to what those opponents of this policy perceive the main problem to be - I was under the impression most were concerned about the CRM aspect of 2 Captains flying together, with attendant "Is he going to do something? Should I say something?" problems that come with a shallow command gradient across the flight deck.

Is finding the relevant switches etc. a serious problem from the other seat? I'm sure most of us always take the time to locate the correct switch/pb before selection during normal operation which ever seat we are operating from - and rarely have I ever needed to select something so fast that I couldn't spare the extra second or two it takes to do it from the other side.

As for 'unsafe' operation: puh-lease. When all us Captains sat in the LHS for the first time (probably in the sim on our command courses), did we crash the first few approaches of takeoffs we flew? I doubt it.

Guys who have a problem with this policy seem to fall into three main categories here:

1) those who have spent so long in the LHS they are geniuinely underconfident of their ability to do the FO's job properly again - in which case their vast experience should go some way to assist them in locating the SOPs in the Flying Manual before a duty, and in applying good CRM principles during the duty day.

2) those who see it as an affront to their superiority over their RHS/FO colleagues. A spell in the RHS is probably long overdue for these tw@ts.

3) those who are new to type so command who have temporarily limited capacity compared to their previous position - I suggest they explain this to their fellow four-striped colleague and ask them to sit in the RHS for the day, allowing the 'junior' chap the opportunity to operate from an environment which is more familiar to them.

As I'm not a line trainer I can't act as PF from the RHS during normal operations - we only do the EFATO check in the sim to cater for the worst case scenario of PF/Capt incapacitation on TO.

As if we should just accept anything and everything the stupid management throw at us?

Not at all, but equally I will not just reject everything the 'stupid' management throw at 'us' without looking at the situation objectively.

[FlapsOne]

skyclamp

Given 5/2/5/4 you won't be flying on day 6, you'll be doing SEPs or non FDP stuff.

I have to say I'm no fan of this proposal but, overall, I think folks are making far too much of it.

4 sector day - do 2 in each seat by mutual agreement and go home - not exactly difficult, dangerous or over-fatiguing.

Talks of potential CRM problems are insulting to professionals.

[Right Way Up]

Flaps1,
Just out of interest has anyone looked into the legalities of swopping seats during a duty day. Our ops manual states quite clearly that the company will nominate a commander for a series of flights. By sharing the flying even by mutual agreement you may well be digging yourself a hole in the case of an incident.

[You Gimboid]

Just out of interest - are the Capt's flying RHS going to practice low-vis ops from the RHS?

If cross-seat flying will be a regular occurrence this winter that could be a significant safety issue.

I think the supporters of this proposal (which for easyJet is nothing more than a cock-eyed "get out of jail free" card for the mismanagement of pilot recruitment) should remember that in undercrewed bases this will not be a one-off occurrence.

Additionally, comparing it to swapping seats on promotion is pointless. Promotion involves a high level of motivation to adapt to another perspective, combined with a sense of permanence in the move. The practice outlined here is demotivating, repeatable but not permenent, and all because the company thought it could save a couple of bob by delaying 737 F/O recruitment.

I am sincerely sorry for my former colleagues in EZY that in addition to the chronic roster disruption they now have to be dicked around whichever seat they will be sitting in as well. As for the poor bloke(ss) in the LHS who has to do 4-6 sectors as PF for upwards of 11 hours - I can't believe that anyone is sticking up for this stupid, stupid idea.

[bloggs2]

Gary, fair enough can't argue with anything you have said there. However, don't you think there should be some compensation for doing something that is outside the usual remit of a line captain? People have mentioned clauses in contracts etc, but from what i can see it is not covered. To do the job requires additional training, it assists the company to increase/maintain revenue (not cancelling flights, less F/O's req'd with same number of Captains, increased stby cover etc) so surely there should be an offer put on the table for some remuneration. Even asking before hand rather than a unilateral "this is what is happening!" declaration would have been nice. Maybe the next bright idea should require people who want to be TRE/TRI to pay the company for the pleasure of doing the course, after all it is an extra qualification that they can take away with them and it costs time and money for them to do the course. CTC could set it up, around £20k should be about right!

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Beardy

I assume you are not an airline pilot. If you were you would know that it does 'feel' very different when you change seats. The truth is that some people find it easier than others but most pilots would acknowledge that the act of flying from a different seat is initially quite hard work. It uses up a lot of capacity when normally the act of flying is a 'motor skill' - ie learnt behaviour you don't have to think about. I have no worries about the CRM aspects of this and will actively enjoy flying with guys who I do not normally get to work with.

The simple answer would be to employ the right number of FOs!

[FlapsOne]

There's no problem with changing commanders at half-time just as long as a commander is clearly nominated for a flight, or series of flights, and that commander signs the Tech Log.

I thnk LVO trg/chk training should be given as part of any RHS trg/check.

Sub-charters cost shed-loads and that's my pay rise so, for a limited period, I can go along with this scheme to get over an apparently temp issue............. but my limited support will not be open-ended!

[Kraut]

Let´s face it: An incident/accident mostly starts with a minor item developing to (maybe) a desaster.
A minor item could be a "RHS Line captain", not comfortable and not that proficient and more or less forced to this step.
Looking at the "high safety standards" of EZY ( Own declaration) there should be no need even to take any risk that is obviously avoidable! I know lot´s of experienced jet pilots waiting since month for their assessment!
It is just a matter of mangement planning and not a question of how good some of us are in changing seats and solve still different tasks!
Why support management misplanning in taking maybe a little higher risk of operation (flight safety)???
Some of the very "strong" pilots see it maybe even as some kind of challenge!? I am to old for being happy to display my abilities in the Left and Right seat just to solve management errors!

BTW, Lufthansa tried the same game some years ago, to force their Training Captains fly as RHS/FO duties on normal passenger flights. As far as I remember, this was even decided (against LH) at court.

[skyclamp]

FlapsOne

Given 5/2/5/4 you won't be flying on day 6, you'll be doing SEPs or non FDP stuff

I often do 6 days, I don't work for easyJet!



bloggs2

Gary, fair enough can't argue with anything you have said there. However, don't you think there should be some compensation for doing something that is outside the usual remit of a line captain?

I don't think it's a pay issue as much as safety.


Lager

As for 'unsafe' operation: puh-lease. When all us Captains sat in the LHS for the first time (probably in the sim on our command courses), did we crash the first few approaches of takeoffs we flew? I doubt it.


We were given enough training to feel confident enough! I was certainly. Not in this scenario though! I don't feel professional enough sitting in the RHS, after 10 years in the left! I can't do a professional enough job, or a safe enough one. I am not interested in proving myself yet again, to anyone, for any reason whatsoever! I don't have the willpower to satisfy anyone, particularly management. You must be so very different and brilliant. I wish I was you!!!! NOT.

Norman Stanley Fletcher, You Gimboid, Kraut

Quite agree!

[Dirty Mach]

there have been rumours in another low cost airline that SFOs may be asked to fly LEFT hand seat on odd days to "increase flexibility for the crewing department"

Hasn't happened yet, but watch out!

[rubik101]

I wonder what happened to my last post on this subject? It was somewhere near the bottom of page 2!!
Dirty Mach...............Just where did you dream up that load of twaddle? Absolute rubbish mate. SFO is still an FO not a Captain.

[Right Way Up]

Rubik101, I think Dirty Mach was bsaying that tongue in cheek. And was your post this one in a very similar thread? http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=2045000#post2045000

[Kraut]

@ Rubik 101

You are easily swapping seats with no simulator and such rubbish??
You even are not able to remember where you gave your statement!:D

[unablereqnavperf]

I can't believe the amount of drivel being typed on this thread if you are an experienced and proffesional pilot you should be able to operate from either seat particularlly if you have any significant experience on type. If your are already a captain you should be well aware of what the First officers duties are if you don't call your chief pilot and resign as your to thick to be a captain!

For gods sake guys were not talking rocket science here, only a 2 foot move besides during training we often operate from either seat with no major problems.

I suspect that the only danger is that some ego's may get damaged but as far as I'm aware that is not a life threatening condition!

Any non pilot reading this thread must think we're arse***ls. I see absolutly no saftey issue with this at all after all the millitary do this a lot I have personally operated many large aircraft from either seat and the Airbus A319 is by far the easiest type to change seats on!

Please stop lowering our proffesion with such nonsence!

[qwertyuiop]

unablereqnavperf,

You talk total bollocks. Firstly you cant even spell professional and secondly you have no idea what moving seat involves. I work for a respected company and we give our new captains approx 10 hours sim training and 14 sectors before they are checked out. Prior to this they will have done years proving they are up to the job. Why waste the training if it is an easy move across the cockpit. You have now idea how different each side of the flight deck is. Jumping seats is not as easy as you pretend to know!!

Suggest you finish your school spelling lessons and grow up.

[Kraut]

@unablereqnavperf


Don´t only think of "aviation" querries. If you do not accept other pilots opinion about safety, how about economics??
A good paid captain in the right seat for considerable times, just makes no economical sence!
Management is always complaining about high costs for personal affairs!
They bond you for a certain amount of training received, because training is expensive!
Now they train additionally captains, to operate the normally lower paid right seat! You know probably how low the profit margin is! This decision will not improve the profit margin.

A well manged recruiting and a normal operation with Captains and FO´s will assure ECONOMICAL and SAFE airline operation!
If YOU like to absorb mismanagement by your own pilot skills -fine with me.
Than they should ask for voluntary "RHS NON FLYING PILOTS"! Than everybody will get his chance!

Next time they are asking the FO´s to act as "cabin crew", because it is already the same aircraft we all are flying in! :eek:

[DownIn3Green]

It's called "Right Seat Dependancy" training at one FAR 121 airline where I used to work. Besides the usual sim scenairos stated in some of the posts above, we were required to perform 3 actual TOL's in the A/C from the RHS with a check airman in the LHS every 12 months.

Normally, the Captain in the RHS was the PNF, with seat swapping the norm with the Commander.

In my experience, most Captains assigned to fly a trip in the RHS, whether senior to the Commander or not, welcomed the opportunity to relax rather than "supervise" a newly minted F/O.

A real Captain usually doesn't have the ego thinking flying the RHS is beneath him...and besides, seat swapping means moving all of your sh!t from one side of the cockpit to the other...not really worth the bother IMHO....

[A Tree]

There has been plenty said on this subject already, including some ill informed statements/opinions by some inexperienced, (or non-) aviators who have difficulty spelling.

The fact of the matter is that it is quite simply an unsafe practice to make a policy change such as this. It has got nothing to do with Ego, but the real danger comes from two areas. Firstly, unfamiliarity with the RHS job, this covers ergonomics, visual perspective, physical distraction of switch/control operation et al.

If that was not bad enough however there is the CRM aspect. Many ppruners will recall the landing incident at LGW many years ago when an airliner landed on the taxiway by mistake. Only the quick thinking ATCer saved the day by instructing another a/c to taxy onto the grass to avoid an accident. On the flightdeck of the error jet? Not one, not two, but three Captains! Yes it was a check flight for a new Training Captain in the RHS.

This incident typifies the potential problem of more than Captain on the flightdeck. There are strange communication dynamics which can occur and have an adverse effect on good CRM. Those of us with some experience of this in the past can testify to the detrimental effect this can have on the safety of the flight. We do not imagine it, believe me it is real and for an airline management to make this decision as a sticking plaster measure to mask their own failings in under-recruiting sufficient pilots is reprehensible.

Gotta say though, they do appear to have a long track record of cocking it up in the allocation of pilot resources department, after all, did they not base 50 F/Os in Berlin when the base opened a couple of years ago when they only had two a/c there? Such gross incompetence is breathtaking and if it continued long enough then eventually one could foresee desperate measures being taken which impinge on Flight Safety, erm like..... "Why don't we get the skippers to fly in the righthand seat until we get enough F/Os online?"

One of the reasons that there are not enough Co-Pilots is the fact that the TRSS scheme produces no company loyalty, nor any financial restraint in the form of a training bond. The TRSS guys can walk at any time and guess what? They are doing. Perhaps some of the TRSS F/Os could comment here?

[autobrake3]

Quite apart from the familiarity aspect of the operation this would allow standby call outs for either seat, great. Where is the compensation from the company for this, once again increased flexibility forced upon the pilots ? I'll bet balpa are right on top of it !

[denkraai]

In our outfit only instructors are allowed to fly from the right seat.I've been an instructor now for two years and I must say I find it more difficult then I thought.Especially since we have seat related emergency and abnormal procedures, mixed with Capt/Fo related stuff.Confused?;)

[tocamak]

In having to adopt a policy of seat swapping a company is showing that it has not dealt well with the problem of recruitment and retention of crew but that is the way of the world at the moment. The actual mechanics of operating from the RHS when you are well used to the LHS can become straightforward with proper sim training and a meaningful number of line training flights. Most people find the hardest task adjusting the seat properly when the levers have all moved! My main concern would be the CRM aspect of two captains flying together. In an ideal world it should present no problems as one (the more senior) is designated as the commander and away you go with lots of experience on hand to deal with anything that comes your way. In the vast majority of cases this will be what happens but there are always going to be times where having two "bosses" working together scuppers this. It probably won't be on a big issue as the SOP's should take care of that but a situation which requires a decision from someone to query the actions of their equal. It's one thing to ask of your F.O "Why did you do that?" or even for the F.O. to seek clarification of his Captains intent, it may be harder to challenge another captain as perhaps you would not wish to cause a loss of face. Operating from the RHS has never been an issue on line training flights as you are there in a training capacity and it is expected you will have more than the usual input into the actions of the person in the LHS.

[Damienmk]

An interesting thread and it would appear that the lack of FO's is creating a problem. If the reality is that FO's are leaving in significant numbers, then surely there should be some incentives introduced to make them stay.

I for one believe a possible answer could be in bonding FO's for a period following the company paying for the type rating training. The FO would then be less likely to leave the company if they were going to have to pay out a substantial sum of money to "buy" their freedom from a contract.

Additionally, this scenario would give low hours guys like me the opportunity to get a foot in the door without having to pay through the nose for a type rating.

The company would in effect be buying my loyalty. And I'm sure that loyalty would prove to be a lot more cost effective in the long run than paying a captain to do the job of an FO.

I suspect the problems described on this particular thread are due to a lack of forward planning by the bean counters who are only looking at the profit margins in the short term. Perhaps a sound ten to twenty year business plan would alleviate situations such as this developing in the future.

[Stu Bigzorst]

The TRSS guys can walk at any time and guess what? They are doing. Perhaps some of the TRSS F/Os could comment here?

Yes, the current mood amongst us TRSSers who are getting bored of 99 hours a month + all the messing about is either:

1. Walk

2. Get the Airbus rating, consolidate, walk.

Since it costs us nothing to do so (we paid eJ a fortune on joining), it can be an easy decision. About half of my course have gone already.

Stu

[420 HB]

I agree totally with ATree and Damienmk if easy are short of FOs it must be a problem with the system, so change it. If Easyland HR are looking for newly qualified fATPLs for FO positions give me a ring i would happily take a 5 year bond for a 737 rating. Real world economics prevents me from buying mine up front.
Aldegrove base, jet FO, decent salary couldn't ask for more.

[dawn raider]

what about the captains who have 0 experience in the RHS of that type ? Aren't there many direct entry capts who joined from other types?

I doubt 20 mins in the sim is sufficient for them irrespective of good intentions / abilty.

also, just curious could you refuse to do it? could the company INSIST that you cross qualify ?

[DownIn3Green]

It must be an EU type thing...If you guys would address the root of the problem...i.e. a 250 hr tt pilot in the right seat of a "big jet" then maybe you would get somewhere with this argument...as it is, how many schoolboys know how to reassemble an engine part blindfolded, or would want to?

The EU standard of the license is not realistic...hire real pilots for the RHS and promote them in seniority...otherwise, don't moan about ex-pats coming over to fly the LHS, and all you "Captains" quit your winging about having to fly in the "other" seat...

SAFETY here is not the issue guys...250 PPL's posing as airline pilots is...DI3G

Hey Everyone...ck Dawn Radier\'s profile...what paper do you work for "friend"?

[Immelmann]

DownIn3Green

Do not agrre with you at all! Me, young guy after about 300 tth flying the F-4 as "PIC" Not an "EU-Thing", got my training in the US Airforce!
:D

Nowadays, a "little" older, finding out that some of the 250 tth yougsters do a good job for their experience! But it is not quite common!
:D

And considering safety aspects: I would not call it "winging"!

:O

[DownIn3Green]

Imm...man

Sorry, can't spell that without looking back...

You are an exception..in the EU, they are sponsoring pilots right out of in abitio tng into the RHS of a commercial airliner...

Great for the new pilots, however I earned my bones by getting hired (after 10 yrs AF but not a pilot..ATC) with 2240 hrs (remember the old GI Bill?) into the RHS of a BE-99/BE-1900.

I gained a further 2800 hrs in the back seat of a B-727 before moving to the RHS...after my airline went t1ts-up I typed myself in the 727 and 737 and sought work overseas, where I had a wonderful career...

And I repeat, in the twilight of my career, I thouroughly enjoy sitting in the RHS and letting someone else do the driving...

To clairify, at my airline, this situation normally occurs when the rostered F/O calls in sick or is stuck in traffic or whatever...it is not a normal practice...

However I can assure you that when this does happen I am usually senior to the rostered Captain, and HE/SHE are the A/C, not I....

I still feel it is not a safety issue, if the RHS "Captain" has been around the block enough times, and if you don't believe me, ask 411...DI3G

PS...where have you been, 411A?...

[springbok449]

The thing that gets me more, is the fact that I have spent the last 5 years waiting to get away from those nightmare Captains who have their own ideas about SOPs, etc and then when you get promoted you are faced with flying with them again...

The rules will be different this time round though...:ok:

[scanscanscan]

Yes you will now have the experiance of how to handle them and not let it upset you so much. Good luck.

[dawn raider]

down & 3 greens.

just because I don't feel the need to display my qualifications in my profile doesn't mean I'm a journo.

typical.

[Agaricus bisporus]

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.

[beamer]

Once upon a time my Company might have called me on a standby to say 'xxxx has gone sick - could you fly in the right hand seat to help us out' - no problem as the CAA in its infinite wisdom (sic) allows me to do that as PNF with a couple of circuits in the sim every six months and a LVP once every three years. However, every winter I find myself rostered to fly on an ever increasing basis in the rhs, not to help the Company out at short notice but to keep down costs and allow less pilots to be employed; I'm referred to as a Captain in the summer and a pilot in the winter - spot the subtle difference ?. OK in reality when we double up, skippers tend to swap seats for return sector so no big deal there BUT the CAA and indeed BALPA seem to accept the status quo on this one - I don't think this should be the way we operate, some agree some don't - do you ?????

[FlapsOne]

To answer some of the above:

Balpa were neither consulted nor informed.

There appears to be no contractual breach here. If you know of one, let Balpa know and something will be done (but you clearly are not a member so............)

3 TOs in 90 can be in either seat.

CAA have to approve it.

SIM LVO trg is to be given (I'm now told!).

Why vent your spleen on this forum?? Use the company Intranet then maybe the people who dreamt up this idea will give you an answer.

[roundwego]

I am amazed this is such a major issue with some people. I have until recently been working for an organisation with in excess of 150 pilots and we regularly flew two captains together. As far as I am aware it was never raised as a problem.

Yes, I would agree that there is the potential for CRM issues but that was dealt with as part of routine CRM training. Base checks for captains were done in alternate seats each time so we were fully assessed for handling competence in each seat once a year.

I would agree that for cost reasons this is not ideal but if you have a 50/50 split, captains verses non captains, one could have a situation with a higher number of captains sick or unavailable for a period and you then end up with co-pilots as useful as the pope's testicles. We used to have about a 60/40 split and it used to work fine.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Flaps One, you say there is no contractual difficulty here. I wonder...

If a contract says, "You are employed as Captain..." then I doubt it would take much of a lawyer to prove that if you were asked to operate as a First Officer then this is outside the remit of your contract, cos when acting as FO you clearly aren't the Captain, just as it would be if you were asked to load baggage, serve the tea or work in reservations. But as I said, I'm not promoting demarcation arguments here, just safety.

But why wasn't BALPA involved? Is the company able to do anything they like without consultation? If so I really wonder if it is worth shelling out the vast sums membership costs when all it seems to give is a qualified level of legal protection in case of dispute or accident. A loss of income policy would be much cheaper.

[FlapsOne]

I actually said no apparent contractual breach - not difficulty.

Does your contract say that you are employed soley as a Captain??

If it does, no problem.
If it doesn't, what are you on about?

Amazing how the company does something - so it's Balpa's fault, but folk like you wouldn't dream of joining forces to stop stuff like this happening would you???

Wait, don't tell me.........you're one of those who would join up instantly if Balpa fixed everything on the planet and there was nothing left to do. Why not join the battle rather than running away hoping someone else will win it for you?

So, if that line is in your contract, you have nothing to worry about!! Let us all know how you get on.


Bottom line:

If it's illegal or a contractual breach/change, Balpa can stop it, but if you just don't like it and your not a member.......take a hike and fight your own battles!

[Gary Lager]

If a contract says, "You are employed as Captain..." then I doubt it would take much of a lawyer to prove that if you were asked to operate as a First Officer then this is outside the remit of your contract

I was under the impression that the title of our job was 'Pilot' - My ATPL (with attendant type rating etc) is no different in any respect than that of the Pilot sitting beside me in the flight deck.

The titles 'Captain' and 'First Officer' are mererly honourific, allocated according to a particular requirements of the company and within the protocol arranged, in the main, by fellow pilots.

Far too many people attaching far too much sigificance to a job title.

To all those huffing and puffing about the difficulties/dangers of flying with a pilot with actually vastly more experience than those with whom they are usually happy to fly with:

If you have been asked to do something by your employer which you do not believe is safe, I hope you will refuse to operate, as you would rightly expect of any professional in such a situation.

If you do operate under such conditions yet still continue complain on an internet chatroom, rather than to any number of more appropriate and qualified, authorities (who, if your argument is valid, will surely put a stop to this right away), about how unsafe the whole affair is, then one is sailing very close to shores of hypocrisy..!

So the company now don't need so many FOs, since they can cover both seats with just Captains on SBY?

Well, if standby cover is to remain at the same(adequate, but minimum) level without sacrificing the crewing level of the rest of the fleet, that means in fact they need to promote FOs, not work Captains harder. So oughtn't those opposing this concept on industrial grounds really be in favour?

[Right Way Up]

If you do operate under such conditions yet still continue complain on an internet chatroom, rather than to any number of more appropriate and qualified, authorities (who, if your argument is valid, will surely put a stop to this right away),
Sorry but that is bordering on the naive. If that was true CAP371 would have been sorted out years ago.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Flaps, you don't seem to be reading my posts before sounding off.

Yes, as I stated, quite clearly, my contract says I am employed "as Captain". Is that clear enough? What does yours say? Sure as hell it doesn't say as "pilot". Why are you questioning a statement of fact? What are you on about?

"Folks like me", pal, have continued to pay our £600 per year despite seeing our Ts and Cs eroded at every round of negotiations and never seeing improvements, including the loss of one third of our leave, so don't give me that crap about "joining forces". I've been in for years, though I am seriously wondering why. ThusI find the middle two paras of your post rather offensive.

Why was BALPA, as the pilot's official negotiating body, not involved in this? I didn't say it was BALPA's fault so don't rear up! I just asked a question, thats all. As I said, if BALPA is not consulted on matters such as this what is the point of it's being the pilot's consultative body?

[dawn raider]

agaricus,

I couldn't agree more. this has been the first time I've ever joined a union in many years of airline flying and I am quite frankly amazed at ...........

1: how openly the CC members (like Flaps ?) openly admit how toothless and weak BALPA is in easy and that it's all they can do to hang on to our average T & C's.

2: That the most common statement I've read from the CC has been along the lines of ' well if you don't like it , stand up and sort it out yourselves'

3: the complete lack of political ability displayed that borders on ignorance sometimes. PM on the BALPA site is sometimes incredibly rude to the people he represents. (or did).

as far as this RHS things goes. I don't like it, it has the potential to raise CRM issues, it's never been part of my job description and I have no desire to fly with any other captain or commander no matter how well I get on with them.

[Loose rivets]

I did not read this thread ‘till now. I’m just amazed at the concept of an experienced skipper having to move across to RHS let alone PNF duties as standard.

The shortest job I ever had was 3 minutes. The “our captains take it in turns” statement had me saying something like F-orf I fly as captain or not at all. The boss man said that I sounded like an arrogant b*****d, and the interview went downhill from there.
:ugh:

[Mr Ree]

Flaps one - that's it. I have had an utter gutsful of Balpa and what it represents at easyJet.

Because I am exhausted from operating 5/2/5/4 I have to be careful not to become too emotive while writing this because I am truly f******g mad.

But you have inspired me, whether naively or not, to do everything I can do to get easyJet management to discuss future issues regarding pilot welfare/contract etc with another outfit, any outfit, other than Balpa.



:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[DownIn3Green]

As I said...must be an EU type thing...you folks need to get over it or leave the industry...things are what they are because of the way you've let them become....don't really have these probs in the USA...

BTW...how many of you "whining" so called ""I'm flying the LHS or nothing, my job is Captain" types could pass a JAR conversion today?

Get over it...as for your union...ck out the NWA thread ref: ALPA and the mechanics....

[orangetree]

well you've gotta hand it to the (mis)management. A cunning plan to introduce this garbage just before the pay negotiations. Therefore if any type of compromise is reached on it, The cc think they've achieved something but we still all end up worse off than last year. If Easyjet want to save some money why don't they pay off some of the muppets in LTN the consistently dream up these hair brained schemes.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Down in 3, you have it right up to a point; it is our fault because we don't stand up for ourselves as we should. You are utterly wrong however with accusations of whining. No one here is whining and a Capt is not usually expected to fly in the RHS, at least in my modest 20+yrs in commercial aviation I have never heard of it before. It may happen in the US, but then FOs don't even need type ratings there as I understand it. We do things a little differently here.

What I am really pissed off about is the fact that we, as a group, seem minded to allow this further chip at our terms and conditions without real protest, and our Union seems to be defending the management line instead of ours. Of course BALPA cannot achieve the impossible, and we, ourselves, are BALPA - it ain't no troop of cavalry lined up at Fort New Road ready to gallop to our aid. Our reps work like Trojans to modify the wilder schemes of the orange shed, touble is that BALPA doesn't see very much at all as possible, and has so often let us down where we have been promised so much progress and yet achieved a worse position than when we started, accompanied by crowings that their achievement was so fantastic under the circumstances and we should all be grateful (for the shafting...) Again, why is BALPA so silent on why they were not consulted on this? In any other industry the union would be screaming blue murder at such a change without consultation. It is this complacency that worries the fee paying members. Chip chip chip. Aint gonna be anything left to chip at before long.

Sorry, but unless BALPA does start to show some ability at achieving results on our side and not on behalf of the management then they will be increasingly seen as a busted flush. Last year I had 30 days holiday. This year I have 20 and BALPA claims this as a great improvement in terms of lifestyle and I should be grateful or it could have been worse. Oh really, how? My family do not agree. Chip. We lost our proper recurrent classroom training and BALPA muttered not one word despite the loss of a couple more days of our own time to do the work at home. Chip. We have to provide our own computers to read the company manuals, cost £600 or more. This is simply outrageous. Not a bleat from BALPA. Chip. Would they say a peep if it turned out we'd all have to buy Macs and not PCs? The hell they would!FOs found their loyalty bonus talked away, Chip. Talk abounds on doing away with Capt's bonus too in exchange for some unpromisable profit share scheme which BALPA inexplicably seems to favour. Chip. Now we are to work FOs duties with possibly insufficient training and BALPA is not even bleating about it. This is not progress, or value for money. Chip.

We will never recruit new members on this sort of record.

Chip chip chip.

[10002level]

The continual erosion of the terms and conditions at easyJet is a direct result of the complete lack of leadership from the BALPA cc who have repeatedly rolled over in the face of the management “divide and rule” tactics. They have consistently told the members that we should accept reductions in our terms and conditions with the result that the F/Os have lost their loyalty bonuses and have to put up with 90% pay for six months on promotion, whilst everyone has lost a huge chunk of their leave with a less than ideal rostering agreement where the company's obligations are merely "asperational". Now we are being told that they can do nothing about the company requiring captains to fly in the RHS.

I feel that my interests have been “represented” by lapdogs. But then again, at least a Chihuahua has balls……………..

[alternatelaw]

If all captains refused to take a RHS check then EZY would really be in the S**t.Don't think managers could do anything about it.I think the reason the F/O's are leaving is because they are being screwed AGAIN! as EZY are bringing in DEC's on both types which has happened before.

[ZQA297/30]

I have spent time on both sides of the union/management divide.
My experience was that unless something was important enough for the membership to be willing to get off their butts and fight for it, it was "compromised" away.
A number of key phrases kept cropping up.
Here are some
In the current climate.
Reasonable compromise.
Unrealistic expectactions.
Unreasonable expectations.
The best we can do for now.
and so on ad nauseam.

Not once, never, ever, did I hear "we are doing well now, we can afford to offer something more".
Maybe I was just with airlines that were born losers, but that phrase never was heard.

So colleagues/comrades you hold the key to your futures, not the union executive. They can talk till they are blue in the face, if the membership is not willing to back their talk with some sort of action, then it is just that, mere talk. They will be fighting a rearguard action, and the company will chip another little bit off.


(edited for spelling)

[Stan Woolley]

ZQA297/30

I'm afraid that as long as Balpa's attitude is reflected by the likes of Flaps 1 you can not expect people to believe they will achieve anything.

People are not joining Balpa because Balpa have been totally ineffective over the last few years at Easyjet (even though they profess otherwise), and as we see above this looks like being the way things will stay.

If Balpa had stood by it's guns once or twice in the past people might be persuaded but at the last minute it became roadshows with both Balpa and management pushing the view.......'actually this isn't a bad deal so we recommend it'.

'.......Errrr but how come last week you were vehemently against it?'

Not exactly a brilliant way of convincing people you mean what you say!

[ZQA297/30]

As long as the membership are willing to settle for whatever BALPA serves up, they deserve what they get.
If the membership is not happy with the representation, then change it. Surely the mechanism to do this exists.
BALPA is there to serve pilots, not vv.

As the textbooks will tell you, union success is not based on logical reasonable arguments, it is based on power, and more importantly, the perception of power.
Logical arguments are merely the justification (or pretext) for using, or threatening to use, the power.
Employers react to power plays, not clever arguments. Sad but true.

[Stan Woolley]

As long as the membership are willing to settle for whatever BALPA serves up, they deserve what they get.

You're right, they do. However many members put their faith (and not insignificant cash) in Balpa to protect their terms and conditions with some determination.This has not been happening.

You might also quote:

As long as Balpa are willing to settle for whatever management serves up, they deserve what they get.

I know it's the chicken/egg argument but Balpa must get some credibility before they will attract anybody.

[10002level]

If the BALPA members are to fight for something, they have to have the leadership from the cc. In the past we have been advised to accept whatever crap deal is being offered on the basis that it is the best available and that we have not got the muscle to get anything better. I disagree with this defeatist attitude that has been peddled around and if the company cannot crew the flights with the crew they have, what chance have they if the BALPA members went on strike for a day? We have the power - we have always had the power - it is just that the cc have not had the courage to call the company's bluff.

Fortunately there have recently been changes on the cc and these cannot possibly be changes for the worse.

[dawn raider]

we seem to have hijacked the thread and turned it into a BALPA agony forum.

seriously, should this RHS thing not be voluntary ? it s an additional qualification and having been a trainer on other jets for years it's not one I want again.

I'm happy as a line capt in the LHS.:suspect:

[Capt.Paul Skinback]

If Captains are going to sit in the RHS then surely they should be paid the same sector pay as the person who normally sits there and does the same job?
Or maybe it is about time that there was equality in the sector pay between Capt and FO's. A significant £ increase might stem the flow of fed up FO's.

[10002level]

F/O sector pay is less than cabin crew. Another thing to thank BALPA for recommending.

[FlapsOne]

As I said previously, if your contract says you are employed as a Captain - no problem - you have the absolutley perfect get-out clause and I cannot understand your problem.

We asked, a couple of weeks ago, for any Balpa member to send us a copy of their contract if that (Captain only clause) was the case and not one came forth. Now we find that someone has one but didn't contact us but did it indirectly via PPRune.

It's nice to get so much help but still be heavily criticised for doing nothing about it.........even though we are anyway!!

There is so much precedant in all industries regarding the level of union support relating directly to the effctiveness and 'power' of that union, but here we have examples of a few who choose to totally ignore that and suggest the effectiveness needs to be there first - before the support is given.

Good luck to the new CC.

[DownIn3Green]

Aga...Bis...

You are right and I am arguing apples and oranges...

In the USA this is not a big issue as it it addressed very well in most ALPA contracts...

However, I see your point very clearly now...2 crew a/c in Europe must have both pilots type rated, while in the US many F/O's flying B-747's and A-300's don't even hold an ATPL, nor are they required to...

It is a tough situation for you folks, but I would be very careful at this point, because as has been well discussed here on PPrune, a contract Captain, with hours on type is only a phone call away...Good luck to all of you...

PS-I won't be one of those contract guys, BTW...

[Miss Management]

roundwego

I am amazed this is such a major issue with some people.

Why, haven't you thought WHY this is happening??? To kindly help your beancounter above! To slowly erode your life? Get one!

FlapsOne

You may be right here and there, but you have totally put me off balpa. Your attitude is in need of a recency check in itself.

Gary Lager

I was under the impression that the title of our job was 'Pilot'

Far too many people attaching far too much sigificance to a job title.

Why were you under the impression??? Why are you sooooo happy in your right hand set rides? Tell us more so we could se the light as well!
Have you tried answering some of your brightly put questions above first?

alternatelaw

Certainly right, but that's also a balpa dependent act! Do it on your own and you may get hurt.

[autobrake3]

Maximum : Daily duty periods
Weekly duty periods
Monthly and annual fight time

A constant dibilitating roster of exteme earlies or lates (how can 5 consecutive four o'clock alarms be less fatiguing ?)

Minimum annual leave.

Inability to obtain requested days off.

Many low houred fo's

Unachievable turnaround times with often ineffective groundstaff (diy)

Flydras to ensure appropriate admonishment whilst busting a gut to achieve safe delivery of above mentioned schedules. (I note no flydras equivalent is active amongst the office bound inventors of all these requirements)

And now rhs ops as well.

Whilst management pontificate about flight safety in all it's far reaching corners the collective of the extemeties mentioned is simply paying lip service to overall safety.

With far less than 50% membership balpa has become irrelevant in safe guarding T & C's. The bickering on these threads says it all.

When you are tired and rushed getting airborne is probably not a good thing. Stand up for yourselves and decline if it doesn't look good.

Toodle pip !

[TRon]

Having been tango'ed for about a year now I have slowly had my rose tinted specs darkened slowly!

RANT ON

Now I know nothing is perfect at easyJet but as many say it is quite close to becoming a very good airline. I speak to so many captains who speak of it 2 years ago where, whilst it was hard work was still a good place to work.

I just see now that we are getting sillier and sillier, and bickering amongst ourselves about an everdecreasing set of standards that are slowly getting closer and closer to Ryanair's for a lot less money and whilst BALPA isn't doing a thing to stop this.

It is almost fact that anyone who is any good as a BALPA rep is sidelined and offered a management position (look at BA) and the rest are left to sing louder about how much they do in their spare time whilst us on the line get second hand info and small colmuns in the log, whilst the rest is filled with BA Blindline info and stuff about TVR's. Great, thanks.

What is this thread about? Captains in the RHS. Do I think it will compromise safety? No more than the 5 consecutive earlies, followed by disruption, followed by minimum rest in noisy cramped 737 cockpits and like others have said unrealistic turnarounds where cabin crew are now supposed to check 100% of lifejackets in a diminishing time? The job is going to get done day in day out due to the fact the aircraft are excellent...crews professional and the law of averages but the crew are tired sometimes fatigued. Who wants to call that in all the time if at all? These fatigue studies are a joke, they come in to see you after you get off leave. "...What do you think buddy?? I feel great I just had a week in the Maldives?!.."

Why dont we have someone from the CAA or these fatuge specialist spend 3 months shadowing one person unbeknown to crewing etc and see how they like it?

I am not joking when I say I have had turnarounds where I havent had time to go to the toilet, then we havent touched on how bad I 'feel' when I ask to go in the cruise.

This airline are on a massive money saving drive and yet they seem to be doing it in all the wrong places. They get rid of our Base Support Admin and replace it with Cabin Crew 'Assistants' who now look down their noses since I cant change my password for my email full of Phil Barton's propaganda which he now get's someone else to email out.

Then we see all this Step Change crap? I mean has anyone worked out what it is and who the hell are the Ambassadors?! Just have a look at some of the job titles and the number of people doing it. Imagine not one of them is on less than 25k average..to do what SAVE money?

So they think they can ask already overworked captains to sit in the RHS for 85k a year to be nothing more than a Radio Operator then great.

What will go next? Crew Food? No Pay Rise? Pay for recurrent training? No HOTAC?

I feel someone somewhere is losing the plot and slowly but surely we will see things getting to the point where Ryanair is a viable option as there will be nothing betwwen us in terms of conditions and if Ryanair do go to 5/4 as they are promising I will be seriously considering it. At least there you join knowing you are going to be screwed but get paid a lot more for it. They operate their airline on half the staff. We offer no more in terms of service than them...unless you speak to someone in Luton who say our on board branding blah blah....I hear more and more people thinking about it, for each RHS/LHS it is another 1k a month minimum...They are moving in on our bases and routes. I know many an FO that is just waiting for his Bus course, 500hours on type then he/she is off elsewhere but ahem...of course there are so many TRSS and Cadets waiting in the wings for their shot at the title...

I dont think anywhere is perfect, but I think slowly but surely this place is going to the dogs and it need not. This is the next in the line of management ideas which are ill thought out and just implemented before they guage any kind of impact on morale..and the answers are out there..it is not going to go down well, but when did that get in the way of a good idea?

RANT OFF (for another year!)

[Shaka Zulu]

wow impressive rant, my compliments TRon.
after being here for approaching 3 years I must admit that i feel that we are losing the plot a bit too.
a lot of what you are saying is true to a certain extent but a lot isn't either.
go and have a look at some of the european bases, you'll find a lot of happy campers there!
it seems that the UK bases (LTN in particular) are being screwed beyond recognizition, and personally I have never heard so many guys talking about leaving.
WHY CANT BALPA GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER?
Somewhere they lost a lot of credibility and it will be hard to ever get this back.
I'm a member but do not understand the lack of communication.
At least make it look like you are fighting and not just communicating and discussing with the company.
Knowing that it is the most productive way, members like to hear differently though!

[You Gimboid]

Will you lot stop already with the "Balpa this and Balpa that.."!

BALPA is a U N I O N made up of members and the CC are locally appointed (elected) members of the union who have the guts to stand up and be counted, go toe to toe with the management, put in hours of extra work whilst doing a full roster like everyone else, and ultimately find that no bugger will stand up and be counted with them.

I bet half you people screaming about it aren't even Balpa members, or you just have some axe to grind and point at this lot and say "see? Balpa are crap, I told you"

If you are Balpa members, 'kin well get yourselves on the council and start kicking some management butt. You will soon discover that it is a very lonely place.

Otherwise - I suggest EZY captains follow the FOs out of the door asap. You are going to be paid less in the long run anyway, you might as well take the hit now on your own terms and be better off in the future.

[Kraut]

@ you gimboid

What kind of statement is this?

...I suggest EZY captains follow the FOs out of the door asap.....

A UNION in combination with the CC is there to protect the interest of it´s members!
The CC does it voluntary (respect for that)! However, it is just their task to hold up management decisions against the pilots!

Just leaving the company without any resistance to questionable management decisions is ridiculous. However, if BALPA and the CC give up and management can do more or less what they want.......than it´s time to go!

Back to the thread. RHS captains (PNF) operations have to be avoided.
How? That should be discussed internally!

[Stu Bigzorst]

I understand that the idea of putting CPTs in the RHS has now been knocked on the head.

[PimpMy737]

Stu, I guess they've managed to persuade enough FO's to sell their leave back in the coming months to cover the flights?! Double the leave at the time of my choosing doesn't interest me, I guess it did others. Fair enough deal I guess.

Crewing levels really have been ridiculous this year, but I'm sure noone in orange land will lose their job over the cancelled flights, subcharters and disruption to everyones lives.

Roll on the Airbus, and say goodbye to even more of us!!

[Banzai Eagle]

Tron
And you've only been at easy a year!!

[You Gimboid]

Kraut

The important word in that particular sentence you quoted was OTHERWISE.

I do not advocate leaving in place of proper union consultation, but if that consultation is not supported by other members, then there are few other alternatives to steamrollering by greedy management.

Very glad, incidentally, to see the idea has been deep sixed.

[Fly_Right]

Has it been binned?

Still planned for Capts to do RH OPCs next month onwards in the sim.................