SAA Flight Attendants rip the ring out at IAD

[4HolerPoler]

Sad state of affairs when the bunch-in-the-back starts vetoing the Captain's discretion -

Cash-strapped SAA had to fork out hundreds of thousands of rands after cabin attendants refused to continue with an international flight. The crew of 14 attendants face suspension when they return to work this week pending an investigation into their behaviour. The SAA flight with 244 passengers on board was taxying out from Washington's Dulles Airport when the flight was told to hold due to bad weather.

After an hour's wait the crew approached the captain and informed him they were not prepared to continue with their flight. They said that they would exceed their flight and duty time limits on the 15-hour flight to Johannesburg.

The captain, however, has the discretion, according to SAA's Flight Operations manual as well as international Air Navigation Rules and Regulations, to extend duty time by up to three hours. And he exercised this right. Following extensive consultations, the defiant crew flatly refused to continue. The captain had no option but to cancel the flight to Johannesburg in the interest of passenger safety and comfort. The aircraft had to return to the airport. The overnight accommodation for its 244 passengers and crew, as well as extra handling fees, ran to many hundreds of thousands of rands, the report said. According to Robyn Chalmers, SAA's head of group corporate affairs, not all passengers could be accommodated at hotels. "Due to the lack of beds in Washington, many of our passengers had to spend the night at the airport, for which we apologise." SAA was investigating the situation and if any breaches of onboard discipline and procedures were found, "we will take firm action," said Chalmers, which would begin with the suspension of the crew this week.

In the event that they're found to have acted illegally, it is imperative for SAA to impose the maximum disciplinary measures, to ensure that this does not become an accepted practice.

4HP

[Contract Dog]

fire the lot of them!

Dog

[Goffel]

Contract Dog, I totally agree with you there.

But can someone with some legal insight answer this quessie.

Since it is legally the captains perogative to extend the duty time by 3 hours, does this not come down to mutiny of the crew.

And to answer their pathetic answer of being overworked and putting the passangers lives at risk and inconvenience, they do sweet flop all most of the time anyway......or was it the extra S&T allowance that they scored and screw the pax and whoever else had connecting flights and things to go to.

Ja boet, when the lot in the back start dictating to the okey in the front, it is time to change airlines.

Me, I never travel SAA, as you know that you are never going to leave and arrive on time, and now you dont even know whether it will be the came day.

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :mad: :mad: :ugh:

Goffel...:E

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

From some rumbling of the not too distant past comes the remembrance that Captain's discretion may be applied by him in respect of his crew. The crew must agree to the application of discretion for it to be applied. Such agreement, whilst perhaps advisable, is not mandatory. The crews' decision does not have to be unanimous in that so long as minimum crew for safe and legal flight agree to extend a flight duty period into Captain's discretion, the aircraft may depart having left behind any crew who did not agree to extend into discretion.
If that is the case, then the crew were perfectly within their rights in refusing to extend, especially bearing in mind that the flight had not yet left its departure point. Discretion is primarily designed to enable a flight to continue in the event of unforeseen circumstances occurring down route. It may not be used for the purposes of planning a flight.
That said, it is to be hoped that the cabin crew passed a very uncomfortable night on the airport floor rather than returning to the party.:eek:

[PAXboy]

Children find it such fun to defy mummy and daddy. Unfortunately, they will find that, in the morning, they still have to go to school and learn their lessons.

If this is all true, then SAA had better make sure that they publicise the punishments. Not just for the other staff but for the PAX. Both past and future pax need to know that this will not happen again.

[Contract Dog]

fire the lot of them. legal BS asside, the MEL and captains discretion are , by my understanding, put in place to afford the crew the oppertunity to continue a flight to the best interest of safety and secondly the interest of the company, some crew seem to forget who pays them each month and when given an opertunity to help the company out within the confines of the law, then by god, the crew should go out of their way to help them out. Why bother to join aviation if you are not prepared to be flexible and ensure the company makes a proffit and everone gets to keep their job. By their actions, they robbed their fellow crew of money in the kitty for bonuses, training, pay increases and so on. if they were my fellow crew, I for one would have a serious issue with that. I hope that SAA makes a serious example of this.

Dog

[line-driver]

I think some key statements are ..
Captain's discretion may be applied by him in respect of his crew
However...
The crew must agree to the application of discretion

crew were perfectly within their rights in refusing to extend, especially bearing in mind that the flight had not yet left its departure point
Discretion ....unforeseen circumstances occurring down route. It may not be used for the purposes of planning a flight.

Bravo Bravo Bravo for the cabin crew in taking this stance. There is no way that a Captain will enforce his way upon me if it is illegal and I am not in agreement with it..in todays environment of lots of work, maximum FDP's, minimum rest and low low low wages it is unreasonable to expect happy and "willing to go the extra mile" crew members.

[south coast]

According to the initial statement at the beginning of this thread, the delay was due to bad weather and therefore not planned.

This is exactly when the discretion rule should be used.

However, the crew should all have been well rested and ready for the flight.

The extension of their duty by 1 hour, and refusing to do it is shameful, why, because there could have been headwinds which would have made the flight last an extra hour, same thing?

Of course if it makes the flight unsafe or they are fatigued for some reason, but could someone in the know inform us of how much rest these people would have likely had before this flight. (what is the schedule for a Washington trip?)

They should all be disciplined, if the flight deck crew deemed it ok to extend by an hour, and lets face it, they are slightly more important than the cabin crew, then the cabin crew could at least do the same. (of course there is no obligation to do so, but common sense must prevail in some instances, and this is one of them.)

Wonder what kind of if authority the captain commands these days anyhow, especially in the special situation of SA/SAA.

[Lex44]

That's a first. Crew standing down the Captain. Isnt the extension of duty time inevitable now? Maybe they should take a permanent holiday - sack. Poor pax!

Would like to know how they get back to SA. Probably not on SAA.

[boypilot]

Here goes but don't quote me -

Non acclimatised cabin crew are allowed a maximum FDP of 13 hours.
However in flight rest of 5 hours is provided in a bunk, therefore maximum FDP may be increased by half the in flight rest provided ie 2.5 hours. Therefore max allowable FDP is now 15.5 hours.
IAD JNB direct is 15 hours block.
Hence with a 1 hour delay, the cabin crew were out of FDP by 30 minutes.

THE CAPTAIN, HOWEVER HAS THE SOLE DISCRETION TO EXTEND A DUTY PERIOD BY A MAXIMUM OF 3 HOURS, PROVIDED HE BELIEVES THE FLIGHT CAN BE COMPLETED SAFELY!

These individuals have a lack of respect for the chain of command ,their profession and their passengers.

[Romeo E.T.]

THE CAPTAIN, HOWEVER HAS THE SOLE DISCRETION TO EXTEND A DUTY PERIOD BY A MAXIMUM OF 3 HOURS, PROVIDED HE BELIEVES THE FLIGHT CAN BE COMPLETED SAFELY!


With this statement in "bold" letters it gives me an idea that the decision was a very "one-sided" one that the Captain demanded instead of asked in a "humane" way, that was all that this crew needed to get there "moer-meters" stripped, and thus resorted to this "legal-loop-hole" to refuse to do the duty.

I am sure that had the situation been put across more diplomatically and in a sense of "team-work" the outcome might have been different.

CRM ..thats my humble opnion.....or possible lack of "tact there-of

[ppessoa]

Cabin Crew often work out of time and duty, and one flight gets cancelled and now everyone thinks its lack of discipline!!! Good for them, that is quite a hectic night stop in the first place for such a long flight!! Flight crew and cabin crew should stick together and stop talking sh... about each other!!

[4HolerPoler]

Managing a large aircraft (or a small one for that matter) is not a democratic process; decisions need to be made and at times they will not be popular. The captain of the aircraft is the individual delegated by the company (and the regulatory authority) to make such decisions.

Someone has screwed up here - I would place my money on the fact that the captain's calculation on whether his discretionary decision was legal or not was correct. And I would hazard a guess that the CC's decision was based on the fact that they were going to be tired at the end of all of this.

My point is that it won't take more than one round-table to work out who was at fault in this decision-making process. And if the CC are unable to justify their decision then the company should ****-can the lot of them to make it clear to rest of the company that decisions such as this require responsibility.

4HP

[Contract Dog]

could not agree more 4HP:D i am dam sure that the captain of that a/c did NOT get his position from poor decision making. The buck stops with him and if he is fine to fly then i am pretty sure that that the CC could manage their job in a safe manner.

[line-driver]

I must add that I am shocked that in this modern day and age there are still thought processes along the lines that the Captain still carries the ultimate and overiding decision making (popular or un-popular) decision that can ruin a team work and CRM process just because he is empowered by the company and authorities to be in that position.

If this is the way things are developing then it wouldn't surprise me if more of these rebelions are going to take place, never mind the the total breakdown of communication between flightdeck and cabin crew, where its even possible that the cabin crew will maliciously not bring a safety related issue to the flightdecks attention because of the wall that the flightdeck crew have built up, due to their arrogant and "god-like" attitude towards their own cabin crew.

The previous statements make it sound like the "glorified-bus-drivers" are beter than the "kitchen staff and waiters", just wait until the busdrivers scrape the tail on their Jumbo and don,t know it, the cabin crew in the rear hear it but keep quite on purpose to "just let them figure it out for themselves up-front, why should we tell him that he just messed-up, he just disrespects us in any case"

IMHO

[Sir Osis of the river]

Linedriver,

I think you have got it all wrong. There may be a few Capts. out there who think they are God, but for the most part they are all just professionals trying their best to carry out their duties with due regard to safety, the law, passenger comfort and economic viability of the company.

If Cabin Crew did as you seem to suggest and failed to report safety items it would only further highlight the calibre of cabin crew you work with, and your airline employs.

As was stated earlier, It is at the sole discretion of the Capt. to apply an extension to duty. However, you seem to have missed the point that he still needs agreement of the rest of the crew. (In this case he did not get it, so was forced to cancel the flight.) The rest of the crew however should realize that "No Fly" means No Income for the company, therefore NO JOB!

When will they Learn? Hopefully in their next place of employment!

[putco]

How I love flying freight!!

No more GalleyFM......

[cavortingcheetah]

hmm:
Actually, in terms of extension of duty by the use of captain's discretion, the crew would not legally be required to justify their decision not to comply with the captain's request.
The captain was no doubt quite corrrect in his calculations and interpretations. The decision on the part of the crew not to extend a flight duty period for a single sector flight (?no en route stops?) seems fatuously self serving. Such a decision, on the face of it, demonstrates an attitude which is incomprehensibly inimicable to company interests and common sense.
Nonetheless, whatever the reasons for the cabin crews' decision, they were almost certainly entitled to make the choice that they did. It is probably unlikely that there will be any punitive action directed towards them by SAA and it is hard to see that there justifiably could be, given that discretion is a voluntary process. It is also doubtful that SAA would wish to attract IATA attention to itself by attempting to enforce the extension of an FDP by a company policy of compulsory excercise of discretion.
It should not be forgotten that discretion is a two way street. It can be used to continue a flight when it is to the advantage, usually a personal one, of one or more crew members to do so. It is not necessarily only another weapon in the company arsenal with which to whip the mule train home.:suspect:

[south coast]

Line-Driver said...' I am shocked that in this modern day and age there are still thought processes along the lines that the Captain still carries the ultimate and overiding decision making (popular or un-popular) decision that can ruin a team work and CRM process just because he is empowered by the company and authorities to be in that position.'

Well it does, the captain does carries ultimate decision making, thats why he is paid the most. Otherwise when there is a mistake, an error or an emergency, everyone just looks at eachother and says, not my problem.

You have made the most ridiculous statements, in every walk of life, in every job, in every situation there has to a be a leader and a chain of command, otherwise, we have anarchy.

Secondly, you said this...

'The previous statements make it sound like the "glorified-bus-drivers" are beter than the "kitchen staff and waiters", just wait until the busdrivers scrape the tail on their Jumbo and don,t know it, the cabin crew in the rear hear it but keep quite on purpose to "just let them figure it out for themselves up-front, why should we tell him that he just messed-up, he just disrespects us in any case"

Well, if they didnt tell him their own lives would too be at risk through any possible damage. So you would put your own life and that of 400 odd pax in danger to spite your captain.

Should that be the case and you survived any incident/accident, you would be charged with neglegance and corporate murder (i think is the term) should anyone die.

You are the one giving your own profession a bad name with such utter rubbish.

Not extending just because you can and not considering making the flight work while remaining legal.

[Contract Dog]

:D thanks mate, you just saved me from having to type all of that.:ok: well said

Dog

[madherb]

It should not be forgotten that discretion is a two way street. It can be used to continue a flight when it is to the advantage, usually a personal one, of one or more crew members to do so. It is not necessarily only another weapon in the company arsenal with which to whip the mule train homeTo a certain extent, I agree CC. However, given the situation, I cannot believe any personal advantage would have been gained by anyone. The crew would all have had adequate time off after the flight; I believe the captain would have made the (legal) decision to extend in order to (a) keep the paying customers happy (b) get the aircraft back in time for its next scheduled flight (c) save some money for the company (d) keep up the company image.

The decision to extend would not have been taken lightly, or without due consultation. I believe the days of gung-ho get-home-itis are long gone. After all, when an individual is placed in command of a large transport aircraft in international air transport, it is expected of this individual to firstly consider the safety of passengers and crew, and then only the fiscal aspects of the operation.

One would hope there will be an enquiry, and if the cabin crew are found to have acted in contravention of their agreement, let the disciplinary process take its course. If mitigating factors are found, then the "Mutiny at Washington" may well turn out to be the proverbial damp squib, with only a few hundred sleepless, uncomfortable, seriously annoyed SLF to contend with..........aah to be a Public Relations Officer with SAA! :mad::mad:

[skyloone]

Recently our family were due out to Cape Town out of Heathrow. Arrived at the boarding gate in time, tired kids and all, flight crew were there but no sign of cabin crew. Apparently they had been delayed by an accident on the M4. Also note... all passengers were accounted for so somehow everyone makes it except for cabin crew. The handling staff were not best pleased. Mutterings from staff about SAA and the crews enjoyment of shopping facilities near central London hotels where they are put up. Am told most airlines have crew near to the airport to avoid such problems? Is this correct? Some hours late the CC pitch up wondering along, chatting, laughing and generaly looking rather happy. Some even had a duty free bags!! By this stage pax would have happily linched them. Just find it most strange that the FC can get to there on time but CC can't. Made a note to book another airline in future if possible.

[Deskjocky]

Its a flippin disgrace, and an absolute embarrassment to the airline and for South Africa for that matter. This is nothing more than a militant group of staff trying to make a point. The irony is that this senseless act will only strengthen the company’s drive to cut staff numbers.

I have no doubt that these guys will be suspended and that the unions will rise to their defence and mount their usual militant defence.:yuk:

[Nickerbal]

Well well well, so the coffee makers are now the bosses, its called TIA or AWA

This is Africa
Africa Wins Again

Its just not the "Springbok" anymore! We should vote a new name for it:

Aardvark Air
Rainbow Air Services

or maybe :::

Cosatu Air

Well like hundreds of others my money goes to another carrier.

[I.R.PIRATE]

But I fear it might be too late with certain members of cabin crew.

Was on a flight this weekend which was only carrying about 20 pax. Two of these were seated in business class, and were handed Sunday Times newspapers on entering the aircraft. Just before takeoff, I too requested a Sunday times, and was told that they were business class pax only. I said that seeing that there are only two in business class, and that there was a whole pile of newspapers, I was sure that it would not be too much hassle to let me read one >> even promised to fold it up again and return it as new....:sad: negative, was the reply >> you are not a business class passenger....:suspect::ugh: When I mentioned that the money I paid for my ticket, did not include a sh1t-service payment and that I was willing to pay the crew member for the fecking thing, said cabin screw then stormed off and fetched me a crumpled up Sunday Independant (from the bin of a morning flight) and dropped it into my lap. If I was not so desperate to get home, I would have shoved that crumpled old paper up where the sun dont shine, pull it out again, and beat the person to a pulp with the smelly end.

Good luck....:hmm:

[Avi8tor]

Would like to hear both sides of the story here.

I agree that this should be treated as insubordination, and the Captain's word is final. Feed them to the wolves.

But how the hell did it get to a point where the cabin crew tell the Captain to p:mad:ss off?!?!

Think there are some lessons to be learned here.

[LittleMo]

Coming home from FACT the other morning, I asked for 2 lemonades when the drinks trolley came around. I was informed by the cabin crew member that only one cooldrink per pax was allowed. "So for the R2k I payed for this ticket' I asked, "I only get one can?". Affirm was the reply. I then asked if I could ask for another when they had served everyone and there were any left over, Negative was the reply. Fortunately the guy next to me took pity on me, ordered the cooldrink then parked it on my tray table with his compliments. I swear by the look on the CC's face he wanted to slap the pax and take back the spare can, instead he just glared at us and pushed his cart away, ignoring us totally for the rest of the flight.

The standards are definately on the way down the toilet, seems the attitude in the back is becoming one of do the hell what you like because there are no consequences...

[Gyro Nut]

Whilst I am of the opinion that the cabin crew should have done the flight, and this has been a breakdown in CRM, I think the incident is indicative of the general feeling of SAA cabin crew towards their employer.

Unlike the flight deck crew that are well looked after, the cabin crew do not feel as though the company cares at all about them. Cabin crew cannot even bid for one day off a month! How do you plan a life, attend your sister's wedding, etc? I heard today that cabin crew are being rostered for 4 leg JNB-CPT flights again! What type of service are they going to provide to the public when they have been on their feet for 4 Cape Town legs. The Washington pairing is known to be a problem for flight and duty. If you take sign on 1 hour before, and sign off 30 min afterwards, I have been told the pairing actually involves going into discretion already if leaving on time!

From the operations manual,
"An Aircraft Commander may, at his discretion, in consultation with his crew, extend a FDP beyond the maximum normally permitted provided he is satisfied that the flight can safely be made. In these circumstances the maximum normally permitted shall be calculated according to what actually happens, not on what was planned to happen."

What will be interesting to see with this case is, what happens if the "in consultation" part results in the cabin crew wanting to get off, and the PIC deems it worth carrying on, is it then a case of insubordination if they do? The operations manual doesn't say that mutual agreement must be reached, it only mentions that he must consult.:confused:

[Miragepilote]

Gyro,
It's called career choice. :p hehehe
4 legs or not, the cabin crews chose their professions themselves and accepted the conditions of employment when they interviewed, which includes salary and work hours. They could have worked anywhere else in South Africa, in any career. Nobody dragged them to the SAA cabin crew interviews but their own sorry, lazy and useless asses...:ok: So, live with it or get out and let someone else do the job who wants to be there!!
But unfortunately most of the population in South Africa believes everything is owed to them.
The gravy train mentality, the great South African downfall... :(

[sidestick driver]

Maybe ask which 4 cc don't want to fly, and get them off. Take the minumum crew of 8 (1 per door) for the A340 and go. This is possible.

If it is more than 4 cc, then it may depend on how many pax you have, and it might still be possible have degrade cc number, from there onwards.

You might be unpopular, but if it legal and safe, it's fair. Fly with those willing to work

[asianeagle]

Skyloon
Yes some other carriers do stay out at the airport, until recently, CX were at the Park Inn right outside the gate. Have since moved to Hammersmith, due renovations, but have no doubt we will be right back when this is done.

My two cents worth though, if the schedule is close to flight & duty limits, then the company might from time to time have to anticipate disruptions such as these and have contingincies in place. Clearly they didn't :ugh:

Normally, commanders discretion may not be planned, but only used for unforseen circumstances and with the agreement of the crew involved. If the crew are generally miffed with their lot in life then you are not going to get much help. Who employs the crew and manages them?
The same bunch of apes that didnt anticipate contingincies. :D

Lesson learnt? Employ the right people:ok:

Also am sure the Skipper had a plate full with this and I applaud him for his actions:D, it might just be what was needed to get the ball rolling.

[Deskjocky]

You might be unpopular, but if it legal and safe, it's fair. Fly with those willing to work

That’s definitely a no go, these guys play for keeps and Im not joking. Ask any cabin crew member who flew during the strike period. After what those folks went through I doubt that you would get volunteers to go against the majority.

Lesson learnt? Employ the right people

yes and no, this is the culmination of years of poor ER- basically giving into these guys every whim over and over again. Now the chickens have come home to roost. But I suppose thats what you get by promoting a bunch of radical shop stewards into ER. :ugh:

[sidestick driver]

Point is taken then, however, I think there are bigger problems to come for the Kempton Park Flying Club, if it is being lead by unions and harassment.
How on Earth will it complete globaly, let alone on home ground? Imagine if this was Nationwide, for example! The two airlines fly under different names but under the same airlaw, would've had different outcomes, for sure.

[linuxgal]

From the operations manual,
"An Aircraft Commander may, at his discretion, in consultation with his crew, extend a FDP beyond the maximum
Gyro Nut, just to clarify, this is from the flight deck F&D limitations. The cabin crew F&D limitations do NOT include the phrase "in consultation with his crew". Therefore, unless they had a compelling reason or special circumstance that had to be taken into account, they should not expect to dictate whether the flight goes or not.
Were I the captain I would have wondered how they could claim anticipated fatigue when they had just spent two and a half days in a most comfy hotel.

[Gyro Nut]

Linuxgal, quite correct, well picked up about the cabin crew side of the manual.

Will be interesting to see if the cabin crew get away with this...

I remember an incident a while back at Comair, where my wife was flying as cabin crew. The cabin crew were at the end of leg 2 of a 4 leg flight. and it was clear that capt's discretion was going to be needed to complete legs 3 and 4 due to delays. The problem was, a new set of flight deck crew took over for legs 3 and 4, and the Capt. decided it was ok for them go into the 3 hours Capt's discretion. Leg 2 had landed back at base, and I've been told by certain training capt's that to leave one's base, knowing one is going to go into Capt's discretion, is not only wrong, but it is illegal! My wife felt that it was quite unfair for the capt. to decide on this, seen as though he had just signed on and only had 2 legs to fly. Sometimes the discretion thing is not always fair on everyone!

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

That's a joke really? You can't have parts of crew flying around in discretion with bits that aren't, especially if the captain isn't.
Departing from base knowingly going into discretion means that the flight down route is being planned based on discretion. That would not be legal?
Quite apart from that, reflect on this. If one departs base using discretion, once that discretion has been used up, then there is no more to use. So, if, under those circumstances, one departs base and further delays occur down route, then the aircraft could easily find itself grounded at an away station. That of course is one of the reasons why any half decent airline company operates a sensible standby crew roster. But then that is altogether another story.:ugh:

[SAA201]

Here is a reply from a member of the ASAnews Yahoogroup regarding this topic that I thought you guys may enjoy reading:


I was in a similar situation coming out of New York some years back, BUT we had a street smart SAA captain!
Our flight was delayed through no fault of SAA & the head cabin controller came to the captain with an ultimatum-- "either we push back in the next 40 minutes or we leave the aircraft as then, by the time we get to Joburg. we would have exceeded our legal duty time".
The captain explained to me that the crew enjoy spending an extra 24 hours in Manhattan, but not in Windhoek, so he promptly told them that he is taking off when ATC gives him permission, even if it is past the cabin crews 40 minute deadline. In the event that they would exceed their duty time, he was going to divert to Windhoek where a fresh cabin crew would join the aircraft & the present crew could relax for the necessary 24 hours!
The captain would, if necessary, speak to SAA ops in Joburg & have the replacement crew waiting for us in Windhoek to keep the delay to a minimum.
It was amazing how this smart stratergy changed the attitude of the cabin staff, who, in the event, did their duty all the way to Joburg!
I guess I would also rather go to my family in Joburg or spend an all expense paid 24 hours in Manhattan, that spend 24 hours in Windhoek!

[AfricanSkies]

What about explaining to the pax why there would be a shortened service on the flight, and giving the cabin crew an extra hour or two in the crew rest... more split duty time to be added = crew within FDP, flight goes.

[slapfaan]

"However, the crew should all have been well rested and ready for the flight."

Ha..but herein lies the problem:When you've just spend the whole night in town,MAKING SOME EXTRA CASH in "various" ways..you are most definately not well rested for the flight!!!

Ah well...guess that's what happens when you're underpaid...

Eish capten,but I'm so tyed...eh..yez...:O

[FUG]

I don't think the problem has been fixed at all.
A mate was on a flight to MRU on Friday morning (08 June) that experienced a problem and turned back to JNB. After working on it for a while the crew decided to get off, and were replaced by a full new crew (FD and Cabin).
The new crew then called for new catering as the first crew had already heated the meals on the first attempt. Once catering was on they gave it a second go but decided at the start of the take off run that it was not fixed and returned to the bay again.
At this point the Cabin Crew decided to get off but the FD guys stayed on. Captain was seen remonstrating with the Purser on the apron, who promptly turned her back on him and waved him off. I hasten to add that this is the assumption that my mate got and is not something I know factually.
Anyway, 3rd set of Cabin Crew got on and flight departed around 6 or 7 hours late. Surely if the FD can stay on then the Cabin crew can stay as well. I would have thought, and understand from previous posts in this thread, that the Captain would have made this decision.
They had a terminal cancer patient on board who went into a relapse of sort and had to be treated by paramedics on the apron during the delay. Thankfully he recovered and was able to travel to his kid's wedding.
Unfortunately for SAA, there were around 100 travel people on board, including Executive directors of one of the biggest travel agancy groups in SA, a number of owners of travel agents and top performing agents for SAA.
Credit must go to the Captain who evidently handled the entire situation brilliantly.
Not sure if anyone has the facts from an SAA perspective.

[Avi8tor]

Having spoken to cabin crew, it would seem there is huge moral issues at SAA.

It would seem that the company have shorted the sign on time in IAD. Thus are able to save a day's Meal Allowance and now can give the cabin crew 1 less day off on return. Needless to say the loss of $97 went down a real treat. I have heard the crew were ready to riot BEFORE they even left ORTIA.

Again, 2nd hand story. I take NO responsibility for the accuracy.

[Deskjocky]

Having spoken to cabin crew, it would seem there is huge moral issues at SAA.

What a load of BS! moral issues??

One of the prime reasons why the company is in the position its in because is the rank and file believe they are entitled to a job and that entitlement does not go with an honest days work. The blame must certainly be shared by line management who have run parts of the company with the ability of a six year old. The staff have just had it too easy, now the whip starts to get cracked and there is near mutiny- though times.

This week the first group of managers are being told they either have a job or they have to reapply- its quite incredible what kind of effect this is having on those people who always viewed themselves as untouchable and let their staff run riot- mainly because they were always out on golf days or on some or other jolly.

The facts are SAA staff are in most cases paid twice what their peers in other airlines are paid yet their output is not comparable. The time has come for the organisation to get value for money- that’s why there have been over 400 resignations this year…..the gravy trainers are running scared and its good to see!

[Avi8tor]

in most cases paid twice what their peers in other airlines are paid yet their output is not comparable. The time has come for the organisation to get value for money- ..........gravy trainers are running scared and its good to see!

Hmmmm......

And i thought it was only me that thought SAA was over paid and under worked. Glad it wasn't me that said it this time. Wonder if pilots are included in that lot?

[Deskjocky]

Why am I not surprised its you making a comment like that. :hmm:

I really don’t care what the pilots earn, as far as Im concerned they do their job according to their conditions of employment which is a lot more than can be said for a great number of our other staff. I have no issue with paying a person well – provided they produce the goods in return.

[Avi8tor]

Sorry, but you left yourself open for that one.

But I think it demonstrates the point. I am sure ALL staff at SAA think that its EVERYBODY else thats underworked and over paid.

[Deskjocky]

Well seems you have all the answers then wiseass :ok:

[Avi8tor]

oh yes. It's not rocket science.

Read all my other comments. Get the governement out of the airlines. This restructuring will be as bigger dog show as the rest.

Go have a look at a brief history on 'the world's favorite airline'.

[Deskjocky]

As I said before, you know it all wiseass, I just wonder why the hell you’re not running an airline with all this obvious expertise you have.

Ah yes… “the world’s favourite airline” aren’t those the guys who just had to cough up GBP 300 million for anti competitive behaviour? An example indeed, stick to your day job chap:ok:

[Avi8tor]

Lol. At least they make a profit.

I find it hugely amusing that some of you SAA types go on the personal attack as soon as you run out of ideas.

Grow up friend. If you cant take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

This is not in anyway personal. This is about the health of the country's airline industry and economy as a whole. The money that the tax payer wastes on the SAA dogshow could be put to much better use.

We both know the demand is there. History shows that the state in NOT the entity to run an airline. If the staff at SAA, have to face some harsh reality in the process, so be it. Welcome to the real world.

If you think the company that you work for, cant make it without state money, maybe its time to face facts.

P.S. Oh yeah, dont i remember reading something about SAA and the compertitions board recently? People in glass house.....LOL

[3rdBogey]

Many moons ago I was on board when a certain SAA captain used captain's discretion to extend the FDP to get the job done.
1 Leg. NY to JNB. Started with a technical, then snow....... After the second de-ice, we were number 64 in line. The 3 hours had been and gone longgggg. Now he invoked "emergency limits". We're still on the ground #64. We did the full service, everything! But, that don't make it right! Needless to say, CRM was a subject he lectured, that way he was excused from practicing it. His F/O's were frantically on the mic. to JNB to get a directive to change course for SAL. Nooooo chance at that time of night. DCA inspector on board, mmmmm "Leave me out of this, it's entirely the commanders decision." His exact words.
This is a lot of speculation and of course it's a rumour network. But I often wander about CRM. It's my pet love, but I still see so many people who believe it's for someone else.
One wanders what the Maestro, late D.Hack.... would have done? He knew about CRM.
Like the 800 that went down in West Africa, NOBODY knows what happened till the investigation is complete. Do we have all the facts here???
I still believe a combined effort, with PROPER consultation does get the job done, even in pressing times. But contempt gets fewer positive results.
By the way, the FDP (not dp) was 24hrs 25 minutes......... 1 leg.

[JetNut]

There's nothing new happening at SAA. Same sh!t different day.

[Solid Rust Twotter]

Morale issues, perhaps?

Moral issues are a whole different bucket of eels....

[Avi8tor]

lol, well spotted. I take the red face for that.

[Relic01]

I think we should wait and know more before jumping to conclusions. There is so little info to go by in making assumptions. Hopefully, the Captain had treated the cabin crew with respect during the trip and there were no underlying issues.

Fly safe and relax.

[Avi8tor]

:mad: CRM. Put the captain back in the left seat I say!!! - NOT
I have a feeling the flight didn't start well. Know it was a prob about the loss of meal allowance.
But dont get me wrong, they should be fired....but hate it to happen to me. Can u imagine sitting on the flight deck and the crew have walked off?

[flyingoose]

Hey guys easy to complain about cabin crew when you not in their shoes!!! great CRM!!!! What a crock of sh!!
Good to see that narrow minded bull**** will always be around!:yuk:

[Avi8tor]

Think this was an industrial issue that worked its way onto the flight. So pretty unprofessional on the part of the cabin crew, if you ask me. They have a union, they should use it.

The CRM part is how the flight deck /cabin crew channelled that frustration on the flight. I think you would have to hear both sides and see how it played out.

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

Finally dug out a copy of CAA CAP 371. 1990.

This is old and possibly does not apply to ZA , but, with regard to discretion in the UK, and at that time, it states that,

An aircraft commander may, at his discretion, and after taking note of the circumstances of other members of the crew, if carried, extend an FDP beyond that permitted in paragraph 13, provided he is satisfied that the flight can be made safely.

Paragraph 13, in this case, is the sectors/time of report/duty time schedule.

So from this, the interpretation seems quite clear. It is not a question of what the cabin crew might want to happen but what did happen. It lies then upon the commander's shoulders to determine what is going to happen.

Interestingly enough, the section and its notes actually can be interpreted to give the commander unlimited discretion in the event of an emergency which is defined as a situation where there is a serious risk to the health or safety of crew or passengers, or endangers the lives of others.
No doubt certain medical emergencies affecting one or more passengers would fall within this definition?

Hey Ho!;)

[Rananim]

FA's have become too militant and I'm afraid the pilots sit there and let it happen.Some of their unions are stronger than ours.Kind of the wrong way around dont you think?

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

Well, therein may lie the rub perhaps. If the South African Airways discretion business is a union affair with no clearly interpretable CAA legal teeth to it, a suitable SNAFU could reasonably be predicted.:suspect:

[MrBernoulli]

Would it be safe for to assume that the majority (if not all) of the SAA cabin crew are 'majority'? If so, their behaviour doesn't surprise me in the slightest.

ScAir Zimababwe went down the toilet due to this sort of behaviour and SAA will do EXACTLY the same. EXACTLY. And the 'wit mense', despite not being anywhere near the collapsing monolith, will still get the blame!

Don't you just love dark green?

[Avi8tor]

Sorry Avi8tor, I disagree. There is ONE Captain on the flight and he and has the authority to exercise (Captain's) discretion. It is perfectly legal for the Captain to extend a duty once HE/SHE has considered all the factors. "I'm not working because my allowance is less" is not a valid reason not to extend duty and amounts to "mutiny". CRM does not mean DEMOCRACY.


I think you haven't been reading the rest of my posts. I agree the whole lot should be fired. Mutiny? What would you suggest, have them keel hauled or set adrift in the life rafts?

What they did was insubordination. The captains word is final. However once this authority is lost, what would u suggest, issue the captain a pistol? The captain is also RESPONSIBLE for the crew. This is a 2 way street. Now I wanna know how it got to this point.

If SAA is breeding a culture where 'because I am pissed about loss of meal allowance, I dont follow the chain of command'. Houston, we have a problem.

And the 'wit mense', despite not being anywhere near the collapsing monolith, will still get the blame!

Don't you just love dark green?

Dude, racism has NO part to play here. Get a life.

[cavortingcheetah]

:)
Racism is a perfectly normal part of the Jungian human pysche. It is just as alive and thriving in South Africa as it is elsewhere and probably always will be, both here, there and everywhere. It is perfectly possible that it has a great deal to do with this whole matter. However, one could perhaps be somewhat more polite and express an opinion that certain cultural differences might just possibly have come in to play when an argument between peoples of different reflectivity occured; as a contributing factor to the general and wider discussion of course.:hmm:

[Avi8tor]

I will remember to tell all the survivors and families of those killed in darfur/burundi and the concentration camps that.

I am not denying its existance, but I am sorry, racism has NO place in an airline. When you put the uniform on and step onto the plane, you are a professional.

I have a feeling this was an IR issue that got out of hand. I still wanna hear the story of how it got to the point where the crew walked off.

[south coast]

I am under the impression that the decision to extend one's duty does ultimately lie with the commander, however, a good commander would always consult with all his crew, be it flight deck or cabin.

No where does it say that people are obliged to agree with the captains request to extend one's duty into a discretional period.

So, on that basis I do not believe you can victimise someone for excercising their right to not extend.

I believe the question that needs to be asked is, if the flight deck crew were prepared to do the flight, why were the cabin crew not?

Are all the facts known?

(I was led to believe cabin crew stay in different hotels to flight deck crew, is this correct, if so, what if the cabin crew had a restless night-fire alarm went off or something and where therefore not well rested? - maybe they were making a statement to their employers that their Terms and Conditions are not good. I dont know.)

Dont get me wrong, I am on the side of the pilots, but all the facts need to be known.

[bianchi]

..........re South Coast Q,''where does the cabin crew stay''? A.....same hotel as the flight deck crew.

[Yossarian]

Presumably a crew briefing would have been held before the flight, or at the very least the captain would have spoken to his purser. Using this forum, presumably, any issues pertinent to the flight would have been discussed. If the cabin crew had any issues regarding the safe completion of the flight, one hopes it would have come up at this point. Although not standard, the possibility of duty extension is always present. Once the doors are closed, and they are on their way, the captain's authority and right to decide for crew and passengers is presumed. Or no?

[Avi8tor]

Fatigue before the start of a duty is not the same as using discretion to complete a flight.

If the crew were not rested due to a fire alarm, then they dont sign on. Thats the law.

However, if in the opinion of the captain, the crew are able to complete the duty, he uses his DISCRETION. Its his call.

[spacedaddy]

I was wondering, Hmmmmmm!
If the crew were only 30 minutes over the FDP limits considering the delay, then why not take an additional hour of in-flight rest to extend the duty the needed 30 minutes? I consult as required but the decision is mine.

[MrBernoulli]

Avi8tor,

In your opinion racism has no part to play here? In YOUR opinion. But racism is alive and well in SA. The 'majority' are now having their revenge, or whatever you want to call it. And they are pouring the country down the pan whilst doing it, because their short-sighted aims are far more important than long term progress.

There is NOWHERE in Africa where there has been ANY large scale progress for the good of the nation for years and years. Nowhere. Overt nepotism, corruption and ineptitude are the order of the day, on a grand scale.

[Avi8tor]

Overt nepotism, corruption and ineptitude are the order of the day, on a grand scale.

Clearly you were not around in the old South Africa.

Not the time or the place to rant about 'the state of the nation'.

I am not denying its existance, but I am sorry, racism has NO place in an airline.

...still stand by my statement.

Back to the thread, anybody know how it played out in IAD?

[Avi8tor]

What am I doing in Dubai? Buying a newer Ferrari than the one I already own.

I am NOT saying South Africa is heaven on earth, it has problems. But this is not the forum to discuss politics.

And I dont believe the crew walked off the aircraft in IAD because most/all the cain crew were black and the captain was white.

Sorry kids, not buying that one. So again, somebody must know what really happened, so spill the beans!!!!

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

One has it on the most reliable authority from a female friend among the more deliciously endowed of those among the SAA crews that the problem centered around the fact that the cabin crew were white and the captain was black.:8

It is highly unlikely that any further information will trickle down through these pages to satisfy the morbidly insistent curiosity of those who would know the truth. SAA crews are notoriously reticent when it comes to discussing their company affairs, perhaps for good reason, given the unhomogenous composition of the crews and their peccadilloes. :cool:

[Avi8tor]

SAA has a long haul black skipper?

I think the facts would be a good learning tool. This has to be the worst breakdown in a crew I have ever read about. I wanna know how it got to that position.

[mikemal]

Sorry, CC, but your "well-endowed" information source is off the mark. Perhaps he/she is trying to stir, or, indeed it may be you with the wooden spoon in your hand? ;)

The Captain was not our one long range black Captain, and the crew had the normal rainbow nation complement.

Sorry, but as DJ would say, never let the truth spoil a good rumour :)

It appears that the whole debacle was an industrial relations exercise, with the walk-off spurred by a shop steward. However, the truth will eventually surface as the hearings are on the go now.

[Avi8tor]

Ahhhh..now we are getting there. I had heard it was to do with meal allowance/days off due to the change in pick up time. That ties in to my post of about 3 weeks ago.

[Gyro Nut]

The captain on the flight is a very pleasant guy, and I seriously doubt if it was because of anything from his side that would have caused this.

The A340 had been engines running for 1 hour since off chocks time, due to bad wx. at Dulles, from what I gather, there was talk of maybe having to go back to the stand to refuel.

Amongst the cabin crew, there were a whole of shop stewards on board, and they decided they weren't prepared to have their FDP extended using captain's discretion (The capt has the sole authority to extend this, not the cabin crew.)

Apparently the cabin crew refused to sit down, and would not give the capt the "cabin ready" call. He thus could not take off legally with a cabin that wasn't sterile. He had no choice but to taxi back.

Some have said he should have had the whole lot arrested on American soil for disobeying a commander's decision whilst the a/c was inflight (the a/c was under its own power, so was inflight!). Imagine what the Yanks would have done to them. In the slammer!:D

[Dct no speed]

I am neither Cockpit nor Trolleypusher, but very much South African, applying my trade Offshore!
I must just say that this is shocking to me that something like this happend.

The Captain, whether he is nice or not, is the one in charge of THE SAFE conduct of his plane and the well being of his crew!

If this was a ship the cabin crew would all be walking the plank!

As expads we have to sit around restrooms or briefing rooms all around the world, having to defend our country and some of the decisions thats made there. How can we defend it when mutiny goes unpunished, or will South African Lagdiens wait till cabin crew refuse help passengers during emergencies! Does this not prove how NOT ready SA is for the 2010 World cup!!

I agree with earlier comments that the crew should have been questioned by authorities in the States for interfering with the safe conduct of a flight. Maybe the captain was a nice guy after all for not reporting this to the Authoritries.

This whole inccident has nothing to do with duty hours but all with politics.

Please leave politics out of sport and aviation!!!!

[Avi8tor]

This was an IR issue that got silly. Not sure that race/politics played a major role here. It seems the crew were mixed.

The fact that this is insubordiation is NOT in question. Fire the lot of them, and if there are criminal charges to be bought, so be it.

But I dont believe that suddenly the crew decided that they were walking off. This had to have taken hours/days to develope.

Somebody must have seen this coming. What was said at the crew briefing?

[TAVLA Northbound]

So? Has anyone got anything to report with regards to the outcome of this saga? Have they been fired or what?:confused:

[putt for dough]

This is South Africa mate. You can't just fire someone.
They have unions to help them.
Eish gotta love our country!

[propdrop]

There are alot of things flying around here so to speak. What needs to be established is who was right and then the comapny needs to support that person. and be non-forgiving with the wrong person. if this is a reccuring problem perhaps they should implement a system whereby if crew (fd or cc) refuse to fly whilst the flight (after investigation) could have been conducted safely and legally, there S&T should be withheld for any aditional night/day stops. they could even go further and say that when a crew refuses to fly with grounds that are found to be not satisfactory, then they are responsible for any additional traveling costs.:E harsh i know but something needs to be done. clearly!