dozy roster at EZY [Archive]

Colonel Klink

10th Nov 2005, 18:39

It is always disappointing to see a good name maliciously smeared through the mud, which may be the case here in this weeks Flight International letter. It seems the real author has neither the guts nor the decency to let us know who he really is, or alternatively the sense to withold his name. As to whether his claims are valid or not, please read the thread running concurrently about "Pilots leaving easyJet" to find out for yourself!

JW411

10th Nov 2005, 19:05

I have just reread the letter in FI and I can see no mention of easyJet in the text.

Could it be that you guys have just dropped a colleaugue in the mire by associating his "anonymous company" letter by telling the world that the company concerned is easyJet.

On a side issue, I frequently do 5 or 6 earlies on the trot but then I have 6 days off. Perhaps that's the rub?

FlapsOne

10th Nov 2005, 20:08

Oh come on JW!

LTN + 5/2/5/4 + CAA alleviation

Doh!

Mr Angry from Purley

10th Nov 2005, 20:18

With all due respect the letter looked almost as if it had written by a journo.
Has anyone considered 5/4/5/2? :\

dontdoit

10th Nov 2005, 20:56

Go on, someone put the text of the letter on for us all to read?

Bobby Guzzler

10th Nov 2005, 22:18

Maybe it'll give them a kick up the backside! Changes changes changes - that's an eJ roster. Morale is really good at the moment! And oh the fatigue thing.........:zzz:

Globalwarning

10th Nov 2005, 23:55

Mr Angry from Purley

You are joking right?

5/4/5/2???

Have a look ... 5/4/5/2/5/4/5/2/5/4/5/2

Same deal how ever you look at it:yuk:

cap360

11th Nov 2005, 09:46

Is 5.2.5.4 really working else where in the network, personally it does not suit me at all. In June it was easier to count the sectors where one of you did not have an uncontrolled micro sleep or knap. The company say that they are unaware of problem other than LGW.

Mr Angry from Purley

11th Nov 2005, 13:29

Globalwarming

Just responding to the 5 earlies is fatigueing claim, not heard any comment about 5 lates being fatigueing so seems a sensible idea. 5 earlies 4 days off, 5 lates 2 days off. Would this give a better recovery from 5 earlies? and a little bit of protection to ending late, 2 days off and starting early.

You have to consider that 5/2/5/4 = 136 days off a year. OK you getting done on your leave but there's plenty of shift workers out there who do 5/2 and plenty of Pilots who get 104 days off...
:\

HotAir

11th Nov 2005, 14:16

EJ were trying to get the CAA to increase the limit above 900 per year as 90% of the pilots at Luton and Newcastle are at the limit.

5.2.5.4 seems to only be working in the small bases eg. GLA EDI where they don’t do 5 real earlies 4 sectors max duities min rest.

Cap360 your comment about uncontrolled micro sleep or knap. How sad that this is now the norm, but captains have started filing ASR’s

I know of 2 FO’s that have had to leave because their GP told them that this job was killing them. They were always fatigue. One was even seeing a specialist but in the end quit.

Mr Angry 136 days off a year sounds good but if you have to sleep for 100 that only leaves 36 which is not so good.

Mr Angry from Purley

11th Nov 2005, 18:24

Hotair, slightly ott. Even if it took 2 days off to recover from 5 earlies then your still looking at 104 days off a year which = 52 weekends off.
I'm not saying i agree with 5254 i just suggested a tweak that may suit certain crew.

kalinka

11th Nov 2005, 19:55

the problem is that the easy way does not allow sufficient rest after the five earlies. After two days off I still don't want to go back to work. It needs to be four early/two off or five early/three off at least!

Yarpy

12th Nov 2005, 05:55

It seemed a perfectly fair letter to me. The guy's principle complaint is against the CAA for granting the alleviation to the airline. Some years ago I took part in a fatigue study carried out by DERA (now Qinetiq) into the effects of early starts. Pilots were never allowed to see the report (probably far too contentious) but the received wisdom was that performance dropped off half way through the third early. Now, it seems the CAA have yielded to the commercial pressure from the airline.

Remember, all the airline needs is a chit from the CAA saying they can roster this and that. Then, even with a view from the office of a smoking hull off the end of the runway, they can say they did the right thing if the paper trail looks right.

So, if fatigue is cited as a cause of the accident, then the blame goes back to the CAA. If the CAA has given the alleviation based on scientific evidence from Qinietiq then they can cite that and keep their car park passes etc.

Now . . . Whilst I was taking part in the fatigue trial with DERA I had a couple of long conversations (anonymously) with one of the scientists. I didn't get any sense that they thought five early starts was okay. As I recall they recommended a limit of three early starts.

So, the letter in flight is entirely correct in my view. The writer points the finger at the CAA. The question is: why did they give the airline the alleviation in the face of the evidence?

springbok449

12th Nov 2005, 07:14

Although I obviously do not agree with someone putting somebody elses name to such a letter, WE all have to agree that the letter contains nothing but truth...
Its a shame that the people in charge do not admit this fact...
I think that the current practise, apart from being the most tiredsome is also bloody dangerous.

klink

12th Nov 2005, 09:22

Oberst Klink, excuse me for the similarity in screenname!

I must say I appreciate the b*lls Capt Phillips shows by taking the bull by the horns. Whether you agree or not with the contents.

I retyped the text from Flight below:

New roster is a dozy idea
In the past, the UK Civil Aviation Authority would legally allow pilots to work three early mornings in a row as stated in company manuals.
Suddenly, we can now work five, usually starting between 05:00 and 06:00, with two days off, followed by five late duties, then four days off.
My colleagues and I are now falling asleep regularly on days four and five. What will happen when both fall asleep at the same time?
Sickness and fatigue levels have increased because of the new roster and staff morale is at an all-time low.
The new roster has also reduced leave by a week, and although we apparently get more days off throughout the year, we will be too tired to enjoy them and will instead use them to catch up on lost sleep. Flight and duty times are there for a reason.
We shouldn't always work to the maximum. How can he CAA allow five earlies in a row?
I just hope and pray that two pilots don't fall asleep at the same time.
What would paying customers think if they knew their professional pilots were asleep at the cockpit?
Capt xxxxxxxxxx
Luton, Bedfordshire, UK

edited out the name to calm down mr. Zulu. If it was not him writing the letter, how come his name has been published?

Shaka Zulu

12th Nov 2005, 12:05

Can you stop shouting his name about?
It's not him who's written it, though i fully agree with whats been said!

I say again, CP had NOTHING to do with this letter

Kaptin M

12th Nov 2005, 13:14

Assuming the aforeprinted letter is the attempt of some abinitio F/O, please allow me to drive the wooden stake squarely through the heart of the writer.

My colleagues and I are now falling asleep regularly on days four and five. What will happen when both fall asleep at the same time?It would appear to me, that you - and your colleagues (would you care to provide their names) - might, more than likely, be suffering from a sleep disorder (sleep apnaemia), which will result in the (temporary) cancellation of their licence(s) pending further testing, as falling asleep "regularly" is one of the symptoms of this disorder.

Sickness and fatigue levels have increased because of the new roster The same rostered hours were trialled over a cross section of employees, in different companies, and with no adverse effects being reported.
Please provide the names and the dates on which the sicknesses and fatigue levels were reportedly affected by the rostering, to allow the company to act accordingly in correcting the perceived problem areas.

we will be too tired to enjoy them and will instead use them to catch up on lost sleep.Sleep disorders are common in the overall public workforce, but are undesirable in shift workers, and moreso especially aircrew, who hold serious public responsibilities whilst on duty.
It would be remiss of EZYJET to overlook such individual reported cases, without acting upon them.
We therefore look forward to you acting responsibly for the publics' sake, by advising us at your earliest possible opportunity, of your ability to safely conduct further flights, and of the names of any pilots you have been led to believe might not meet a minimum safety standard to which this company legally operates.

Etc, etc, etc.

Bbow

12th Nov 2005, 13:23

"5.2.5.4 seems to only be working in the small bases eg. GLA EDI where they don’t do 5 real earlies 4 sectors max duities min rest."

Hotair, I think you'll find that in GLA/EDI the earlies are very early, in generally you'll start the first day at 6:00, followed by 4 days starting at around 5:00 in the morning (correction...middle of the night). All days are 4 sectors, mostly finishing around 13:00. You are right in saying that it's not min rest.

BBow

FlapsOne

12th Nov 2005, 14:58

A couple of points relating to earlier comments:

The 'evidence' supported the introduction of 5/2/5/4. Fatigue data from home and overseas was used, plus the trial period data.

Quite often, under the previous 6/3, there were only 2 days off anyway between roster periods...........no great change there then, except now it's only 5 days till a break.

The implementation has been seriously under-crewed and poorly managed leading to continual changing of the agreed pattern, thus nullifying all the reasons for it's introduction.

If EZ have approached the CAA for an increase to the 900 hrs limit, they've done it very quietly without a mention to Balpa (or anyone else it seems!).

Bottom line, crew it properly, run it properly, don't change patterns and then we'll have the absolute definitive answer.

Personally, 5/3/5/4 would work a dream and give max delivery without aggro.

HundredPercentPlease

12th Nov 2005, 15:00

Kaptin,

Out of context, your reply makes sense. But here are some facts:

I was part of the trial, and it was much better than 6-3. However, what we didn't know at the time was that the crewing level was being boosted by crew from other bases. At max hours, 5254 is very hard.

We do 80% on pattern and 20% on "reserve" (off pattern, or random roster). The reserve month is meant to be just spent on standby - yet my last reserve was rostered 110 hours block, 190 hours duty.

The 5 earlies do NOT have the hours protection that CAP formerly provided. So you work 5 11 hours earlies.

I recently worked 5 10-11 hours earlies, had 2 days off, then 4 10-11 hour earlies. I can assure you that you can only do this if you go to bed at 1930. If you choose to (or have to) stay up beyond that, then you are prone to falling asleep " at the wheel".

We have had several cases of this "extreme tiredness", but people are reluctant to report it for fear of backlash. Your sickness record is part of your command assessment, and eJ are particularly hot on sickness, since we can never get a requested day off (so the sickness method is the only way).

On your random roster period, you will be swapped back and forth from earlies to lates in a working block. At all times you can be worked to 0130 into a day off, without it actually infringing into your day off.

Falling asleep on the job is not, in this case, a result of a medical condition. It is the result of repeated very long early duties and extremely high monthly totals. For London crews this is made worse by the very long time it takes to get to the crew room in the morning.

Hope this helps.

EDIT: FlapsOne, posted at the same time as you... 5354 AND an 85 hours a month limit would, I guess, halve the flow of leavers. Give us a decent rise, sector pay equal to CC and some ST and that would stop the other half!

Shaka Zulu

12th Nov 2005, 16:27

Quote: At all times you can be worked to 0130 into a day off, without it actually infringing into your day off.

you forget to mention this cannot be rostered!! only things happening on the day can make you do this.....

5254 Trial Period was great because
a: other pilots from other bases came in to help
b: it was done on summers roster and a lot of the mornings and afternoon links that were accomplished (ai edi agp or krk sxf) on that could not be done because of no set morning or afternoon pattern (in LTN). they now polished the arrival and departure time in LTN so the flights link in handily with the 5254....

You got to be kidding me saying that we have a whole bunch of narcoleptics working for us and that after 20 years of flying I just found out that I am?!??!! Sorry sir, PURE fatigue......

eJ are actually quite good when you claim to be fatigued, I have never heard anything back from them when I did call it. Maybe for F/O's its a different cattle of fish.However the sickness thing should not be an arguement, since most Base Captains are quite up to date with the current fatigue levels on the line. Besides he is a fellow pilot. So repercussions will be few and far between.

Now we have to fight for our rights since Market Mechanics are now too in favour of our community. Lets make a stand and get a deal we deserve.....

klink

12th Nov 2005, 16:57

What seems to be forgotten quite often is that if you only have two things to take care of -work and yourself- its doable.
But how many of us have families?
Kids sick etc?
To jump in bed at 1930 is a very noble target, but especially with small kids its often impossible to sleep as well immediately.

HundredPercentPlease

12th Nov 2005, 18:01

Klink,

Of course, that's the root of the problem. Mulitple long days need 7 to 8 hours sleep. Getting to sleep at 2300 means 4.5 hours sleep - do this for more than a few days on the trot and your performance really suffers. eJ are overlooking the safety issue by placing the responsibility on us (we have to call in sick if too tired), but many are reluctant to do this each and every week when others can "take the strain". Furthermore, if we cannot adjust our lives to suit the roster, we may get an email like the infamous LGW one.

This is one reason why many are changing employers rather than sacrificing their home lives.

Mr Angry from Purley

12th Nov 2005, 19:38

100% after seeing that example i'm going to stay out of this disscussion as i'm beaten.
Flaps 1 5/3/5/4 would encourage crews to join EZY! the problem you have is the turnover is causing havoc to any best practice ideas:\

Fish Out of Water

12th Nov 2005, 20:33

Kap M sounds pretty defensive - maybe he's one of the chaps who implemented this thing in the first place (the flag thing maybe is a clue!). What's more they're the people who always moan the 'kin most. As for the ab-initio dig, time and a place!

Don't know if he works for the same airline that we do! Every guy on day 5 of the earlies is totalled, but that must be due to sleep apnaemia I guess!!!!! Don't get technical now, I just call it been knackered. :8

Rick Binson

12th Nov 2005, 20:59

Getting to sleep at 2300 means 4.5 hours sleep - do this for more than a few days on the trot and your performance really suffers.

I'm not sure I understand this?

On earlies I'm in bed by 2030 and wake at 4am. Why go to bed at 2300? If I did this I wouldn't last one day!

I used to have real problems with going to bed early but have come atuned to it now. I guess everyone is different. I'm just curious....

This is not meant as criticism by the way!

After the strike on pay rostering has to be next :E :E :E :E

HundredPercentPlease

12th Nov 2005, 21:08

Rick,

Just came to those numbers by:

1) 0515 report, 0500 at the airport (to allow for the dreaded car park bus), 0415 leave home, 0330 alarm clock; and

2) Many guys I fly with, when discussing the age old topic of "what time did you get to sleep last night" reply with 2300.

I find 2100 about right - sometimes it stretches out to 2145.

Wouldn't it be nice to sort all these problems in one fell swoop!

Yarpy

13th Nov 2005, 05:23

On earlies I'm in bed by 2030 and wake at 4am. Why go to bed at 2300?
Try life with a young family in a three bed semi.

2100 Kids get to sleep.
2120 I get my head down.
2225 Ten month old boy balls his head off due to teething.
2228 My exhausted wife gets up to calm him down.
2232 My three year old girl wakes with the commotion and wants a story read to her.
2237 I wake and get drafted in to calm things down.
2315 I get to sleep, fitfully.
0440 Alarm goes off.
0441 I leap out of bed, glance through the curtains and can't see the other side of the road due to thick fog . . .

To get round the above I have several options:

1. Ask the airline for a slack roster!
2. Find a bigger house in the south east of Tony Blairs ****ty Little Britain.
3. Go and work for another low cost carrier.
4. Live apart from my family when I am on the roster.
5. Campaign publicly for responsible FTL's.
6. Quit aviation, sell up and find another country.

Rick Binson

13th Nov 2005, 06:34

I am hopefully soon to face your scenario Yarpy.

OPtion 4 looks good, I think i'll move out of our house ;)

Oleo

13th Nov 2005, 06:59

Can we have a re-print of the "infamous Gatwick email" here?

Alistair

13th Nov 2005, 08:48

Fish out of Water
What's more they're the people who always moan the 'kin most
care to elaborate?

outofsynch

13th Nov 2005, 09:49

I dont think the gatwick email is anyones business, who it wasnt addressed to.

sikeano

13th Nov 2005, 10:41

yarpy,s quote

__________________________________

6. Quit aviation, sell up and find another country

_________________________________

i thought bedfordshire was another country try living in england next time

:ok:

ps i can see where you coming from i agree with you

klink

20th Nov 2005, 07:10

Yarp; this is exactly what I went through till this week; the first tooth is finally there.
Now both kids sleep better. This took about 2 months now, though. Thank God my roster was not heavy..:}

FlapsOne

20th Nov 2005, 09:31

With respect to various posters above, it really dosn't matter who you work for or what your roster pattern is if you have young children going through the delights of teething and the wonderfully varied collection of baby/toddler ailments.

You Gimboid

23rd Nov 2005, 20:15

Unless you are downroute for a couple of nights every week of course Flaps! :}

Nightstops? Blessed relief more like...

klink

24th Nov 2005, 14:06

@airbrake:
All is not as it would seem with the letter. The rumour is that it was sent to Flight maliciously. Next weeks letters should prove to be interesting.

Still waiting..:hmm:

NoJoke

25th Nov 2005, 13:18

FlapsOne

Totally agree that kids on the blink are difficult at the best of times. Got three, one blinking ... What certainly does help is a reasonable roster and helpful management. We have neither.

Algy

5th Dec 2005, 15:47

From Kieran Daly, Group Editor, The Flight Group

The following letter is in this week's Flight International (6 December issue). Its authenticity has been verified:

Dear Sir,

“Recently an individual or group has used my name to publish a letter headed ‘New Roster is a dozy idea’. I would like it to be known that I did not write this letter nor did I communicate these thoughts verbally at any point. I am yet to establish as to why my name has been used in such a way.
It was very distracting to find out about the letter 3 hours before a flight and flight safety could have been compromised by the thoughtless actions of the real author. Fortunately as a professional I remained focussed.

The REAL Captain Clive PHILLIPS Luton Bedfordshire”

In Tiffanys trousers

5th Dec 2005, 16:22

Algy

The sentence you quote ... "fortunatley as proffesional I remained focused" ...does not appear in the letter in Flight International Magazine.

May I ask if this is just a bit of " jounalistic license" on your part, or actually a part of Kieran Daly's statement, which you identify as "verified".

My reason for asking is my astonishment at the whole event, a question as to why you would include such a sentence ( are you involved ?) and a sneaking suspicion that the content of the original letter has caused some rather red faces.

Usually when the cover up of an event, of this nature, takes place there are "interpertations" of what actually transpired. Normally to muddy the waters surrounding the event. Your sentence is very much in this vein, from my perspective.

From what is published, so far, we are asked to decide if Flight published, ( 8-14 November 2005) what was obviously going to be a letter of contentious content, without verification of its authenticity, and have printed this latest letter ( retraction without saying so) as a face saving exercise, or

Flight International, after discussions with the "real Clive Phillips" believe he actually did write it, but are finding that difficult to substantiate, or

Flight International has come under pressure from the concerned operators, or the appropriate authorities legal department to withdraw. ( Actually reads like someting JP probably wrote )

Whatever the answer, publishing this letter ( 6-12 November 2005) leaves Flight International,s credibility at some question in my mind.