Capts discretion

[The Controlller]

Capts discretion...........compulsory or whim ?

[fmgc]

That would be upto the Capt to decide!!

[RYR-738-JOCKEY]

Compulsory - no. The thing is, as I see it, it's up to the CP to assess the fitness of his/her crew, and then decide weither to go into discretion, or not.
So, if anyone rejects...then either replace that/those crewmember(s), or don't go at all.

[The Controlller]

Jockey
As my post suggests.....Capts discretion not a new P2 or wingeing cabin crew. Maybe some of our Capt`s could be stronger ??????

[BOAC]

Considered by the CAA to be a 'normal part of a flying duty period' I.E. you are expected to be sufficiently rested to be able to operate into discretion unless unfit. It IS 'compulsory' in as much as if no-one declares themselves 'unfit' they have to do it. Try 'rejecting' extension into discretion and your career will be shorter than you reckoned. Yes it is the Captain's responsibility to 'assess'.

How do I know - I wrote and asked, because it became necessary.:rolleyes:

[The Real Slim Shady]

Just to add to BOAC reply, my interpretation of the use of discretion is as a means to get you and the aircraft home: you shouldn't depart your home base with the intention of going in to discretion to complete the duty period.

[qwertyuiop]

I feel sure you will recieve some different answers to BOAC's. In my opinion it is NOT part of normal duty period, it is there to cover unforseen circumstances. I, and a number of others, have refused to use it (all had valid reasons) and have never had any "major" complaints or career threats from the company.

For Slim.
You CAN depart home base knowing you will go well into discretion. You can also pick up an additional period to get you home.

[Anti-ice]

This is a very thorny issue which often seems to enter a grey area - when it shouldn't.

I have had three ocassions where i had discretion imposed on me, making mine (and some of my colleagues) duty hours that day illegal.

On both occasions, the aircraft was closed up against the cabin crews statement that they were beyond the limit of any legal duty , an air of denial pervaded, and on one occasion aggression was used to force us into a very difficult position/operate the duty.

I fully realise that the operation of any flight is the overall responsibility of the Captain, but crews should not be forced to work when their limit is reached, and it is very easy for a pilot to decide whether someone is fatigued or not, when that person can tell him themselves having been on their feet for 12-15 hours often facing very difficult situations and hostility from passengers.

What is the point of ignoring 'cast in stone' hours limitations when it is just as important as any other safety protocol and has a legal element to it ? :rolleyes:

I don't mind doing any long/difficult duty , as long as it is legal, i am not lied to / denial becomes flavour of the day when the subject is mentioned.......

The worst thing is perhaps, that when you have one of those awful days , when you are delayed 6/7 hours on the ground, it is very uncommon to see (certainly in the situations i have encountered) a pilot actually come into the cabin to show presence/placate and reassure tired/angry farepaying customers......... of course , i know of many pilots who would, but on these occasions, no sign

[BOAC]

Hmm! You are indeed lucky if that works for you:)

Pretty well straight out of CAP 371:

A Commander is authorised to exercise his discretion in the following circumstances and to the limits set.

In a Flying Duty Period involving 2 or more sectors, up to a maximum of 2 hours discretion may be exercised prior to the first and subsequent sectors. This may be up to 3 hours prior to the start of a single sector flight, or immediately prior to the last sector on a multi-sector flight.

[BOAC]

(all had valid reasons)- QWERTYUIOP - therein lies the answer!

At the end of that well-known (extended:)) day, it matters not whether YOU think it is part of your 'expected' performance or not. The company are entitled to view it THEIR way.

The thing a lot of people forget, and one I try to remember when 'considering' using discretion, is not how the crew are NOW, but how they would be x hours from now at the end of the extended duty.

One hears of stories of companies 'demanding' the use of discretion, and the answer there is also simple -get that in writing, as a telex/SITA message or whatever.

[Bealzebub]

Yes BOAC is right, Captains discretion can certainly be used prior to the first sector of a flight and it definetaly is not a "means to get you home that shouldn't be used to depart from your home base if its use will be required". That permission is clearly granted by the wording. If the commander elects not to utilise it thus, that is entirely up to the commander.

Anti ice your statements are rather vague in that I cannot see how a commander would impose discretion on you so that your ( and some of your colleagues) duty hours were "illlegal". Such a situation could only come about if there were extenuating circumstances concerning your (and their) particular duties. In which case it was incumbent on you to notify the commander of the circumstances prior to the start of that particular duty.

As BOAC has already pointed out the limit is only reached ( except in situations that the captain deems an emergency) when the the relevant FDP and any discretion provided by the rules that the captain chooses to apply has been reached. You should ordinarilly report for duty sufficiently fit and rested to be able to comply with such a requirement. The rules provide for flexibility and are not quite as "cast in stone" as you would like them to be, nor is the legality compromised by the use of Captains discretion as you suggest.

[parabellum]

Not sure if this still applies but at one time the captain had to take into account any period of stand-by that any member of the crew may have completed prior to being called out for the flight and it was forbidden to reduce rest after and extended duty period.

Ant-Ice - don't confuse local company agreements about working practice with regulating authority legal requirements and limits, did you do that?

[411A]

Scene.

Delhi, early morning (7am...well not so early) nonstop to CDG.
Delayed departure 2hrs due to VIP movement.
UKCAA inspector riding along, performing a routine enroute check.

So, we would have to go into SCD for the duty period (ever so slightly), and did so, without hesitation.

The CAA inspector wanted to know if I had asked any of the other crew members if they objected, and I had, briefly.

He also said (his exact words)..."It doesn't really matter if they agree or not, they generally do as they are told, and besides, it is the Commander's decision alone....It's nice to ask, but not specifically required."

And, so it is.
This particular inspector was a true gentleman (as most are, in my experience) but believed that the Commander should always have the final word.
CRM....or not.

Now, I'm sure that some here will object, and that is quite OK.
Nevertheless, authority rules alone...not by committee.

[Rainboe]

You might wonder at the motivation of Contolller for starting this discussion! Open discussion by all means, but I don't like the feeling that I am being led into a trap!

Why not review a few recent gems from him? How about:
Crew are only interested in themselves and have NO thoughts for the rest of BA staff. We believe or not have family and friends who depend on BA to live so DONT for whatever shortsighted reasons spoil it for the real BA staff who have a true feeling to keep BA going. Not the """""""" crew
Pray tell us, 'friend', what ' """"""""" ' means? There's a lot of ' """"""""" ' crew reading here!

Cabin crew and flt crew are the most mercenancy breed I have have even known. All they are interested in are themselves and they have no interest or any part in any other part of BA. They will be the death of BA with little thought of the the true supporters of BA who have carried them for years. WW should sack them all all and offer contracts that suit them ? and start again and rejoin the real world. Please remember the staff that have to mop up and keep the programme going. Forget the money grabbing crew and get some real crew ??????
Get a real life

[west lakes]

At the risk of personal injury:confused: seen the one in The African Forum re SAA cabin crew and this
Sorry not figured out how to insert link

[Mr Angry from Purley]

Fond memories of Britannia Pilots working to rule in despute with the Company, no discretion, well except to get back on XMAS eve :\

[Bedlamair]

This is, IMHO, one of the thornier problems that has many, not often considered, implications.

Cap 371 says, as has been noted,
"A Commander is authorised to exercise his discretion in the following circumstances and to the limits set."

Note "authorised" and not "entitled" or something stronger. Had the draftsman wanted to allow Captains to be able to put crews into discretion entirely at their own behest that would have been more emphatic. It is merely a permission that makes it lawful to extend the hours as per the rest of the paragraphs.

A Captain gains his authority as an aircraft commander from the company he works for, and no-one else. The fact that, by benefit of being an AOC holder, the companies award of that position carries with it certain legal responsibilities and powers does not change the fact it is a private company related post. If you have a situation where Cabin crew, for example, working agreements lay down stricter rules than CAP 371, the authorising granted by CAP 371 does not override the fact that your employer has agreed to work to lesser limits - that fetters your hands as a Captain. We do not, as Captains for whichever company, have the authority to over rule the CEO on contract matters - unless that authority has been specifically granted. Compare it, say, to the Alcohol position. were the law to say no drinking within 12 hours of flying and the company to say it is 24 hours, which one will, practically speaking, prevail? The position is that the most prohibitive of the 2 will be the one you must adhere to.

Flt Ops inspectors may have their views, but until they start appointing High Court Judges as Flt Ops Inspectors, FOI's are not in a position to give a legally accurate definition of the scope of any part of the law. As 411A said,
authority rules alone...not by committee. and in this specific area, that authority does not lie within the CAA.

I would suggest Commanders be very circumspect indeed about trying to take other than a totally willing crew into discretion, for many reasons, including their liability resulting from their duty of care to both crew and passengers.

[BOAC]

Bedlam - you quote 411A and he points out that a "totally willing crew" is not relevant in terms of the authority to exercise discretion, hence "authority rules alone...not by committee". It is merely fitness one has to assess. We may individually choose other approaches, but that is the meaning of Captain's discretion.

[parabellum]

Most of the airlines I have worked for have a piece in the SOPs somewhere that authorise the Capt to operate to CAP371, (or local equivalent), rather than any company agreement, if necesary to complete a flight or series thereof.

[BOAC]

Around 2003 (I think) the cabin crew in BA (long haul) managed to over-ride that with their working agreement, and BA FAILED to inform the Captains of this 'agreement' until it became embarrassingly obvious that there was a force majeure at work when they REFUSED to extend beyond the agreed hours. All part of the grand plan to emasculate the BA Captain.:{

[Bedlamair]

You have quoted the most famous (or is that infamous?) example of the point I am making, BOAC. In that case, the Capt still retained his CAP371 authority to extend duty hours but had no power so to do. If CAP371 gave Capt's a prescriptive power as opposed to a permissive power, then nothing that BA or the CC unions negotiated or signed would have been able to interfere with or restrict that power. The very fact that it did goes back to what I describe as the wholly permissive wording of CAP 371 on this issue. The fact that the Capt has only to assure himself that the crew is fit to work the extended hours to place himself in a position where CAP371 permits him to authorise the extension does not mean that, having decided the crew are fit, the Capt can require them so to do. This, to me, has the same sort of didactic position as the: I eat meat; dogs eat meat; therefore I am a dog conundrum. So, with respect, whatever approach we choose to adopt as individuals, that, in itself, is not the meaning of Capt's discretion.

What a Capt then does, on the ground, when he wants to exercise his discretion follows exactly as Parabellum describes - most companies will have an SOP or other instruction that prescribes the contractually based rights of the Capt to act as the Crew's de facto employer and require them to work the hours he sees fit to authorise within CAP 371. All the problems I have seen/heard of arise because most Capts do not appear to realise that the power to require crews to go beyond normal FTL limits and work the hours he wishes to authorise arise from the contract of employment and not from a statutory authority granted by CAP 371 - but try to act as if it does. This is further illustrated by considering the sanctions available against a crew member who refuses, point blank, to work into discretionary hours. Were this a statutory authority, there would be legal sanction - there is not. That crew member will be dealt with iaw company disciplinary procedures for the breach of company employment rules.

Where that practically leaves us is, a little, between a rock and a hard place. If an individual crew member is unwilling, offload them and work light to the limits laid down in the Ops Manuals. If the crew as a whole are uneasy, then that is a test of a Capt's command ability - if you can't carry a crew with you it's best not to blow the whistle and launch yourself over the top, it can get very lonely in no-man's land. If the whole crew are saying they are not willing, that is such a CRM issue that a Capt's duty of care to the crew and pax probably precludes the exercise of that authority to extend and it may be that, in using his/her discretion, a Capt would decide it is better not to go.