QF SOs now operating as Flight Attendants

[xer]

I wondered why the EP questions are getting harder.

A new policy at QF for SOs:

"In exceptional circumstances, relief Flight Crew members(read SOs) may form part of the Cabin Crew complement during takeoff and landing. This may prevent having to operate the service with a reduced passenger load."

Hmmm, so much for safety on the flight deck during critical phases of flight.

Hmmm, Sorry Judge but I was unable to assist/prevent the Captain and FO with the RTO, Total Electronics Failure, Fire, Engine failure, NMAC, etc because I was a primary at R4.

Bet this becomes more common than the above mentioned "In exceptional circumstances"

Wonder what the Pax will think of seeing one of the pilots sitting at a door instead of up the front.

As QF try harder and harder to stretch safety(read spend less money), the larger the holes in the swiss cheese become.

[Howard Hughes]

Probably OK if the flight crew consists of four members, but I suspect that is not the case...:rolleyes:

[xer]

strobe12,

yeah, I got a reference for that, mate!

Its in something called the Flight Standing Orders. #009/2008

Ever read them?;)

[gondwalla]

Just say no dude. Your employed as a pilot not a flight attendant.

[Keg]

Geez, that was quick. Issued yesterday and on PPRUNE already! :eek:

Note that it did say that it required Captain, Duty Captain and CASA approval and it was only as a door primary for purposes of take off and landing. I wonder how it will work for something like a prepared ditching! :eek: Anyone ever seen the demo cabin crew do for this let alone know it!

[permFO]

Yes Keg but it still says it can happen regardless of who has to give approval. I assume the CP had to give his approval for the FSO to be issued?

[Keg]

Of course.

Not saying that I agree with it. I think there are times when it may be appropriate- the recent issue of the PAC Blue flight when someone went sick in mid tour of duty for example although they didn't have extra crew...but you get my drift.

That said, I reckon it won't take long and it'll start to become more routine and that could be an interesting tangent to follow. First it will be someone going sick at sign on in Sydney. Don't want to delay the flight so they'll ask the crew to help out. Then it will be someone going sick four hours before sign on but they couldn't find a replacement in port- Sydney or elsewhere. I wonder if eventually it would just be expected that if a c/c member falls over in (say) SIN that one of the S/Os takes care of the door rather than disrupt c/c off another crew. I hope it'd never come to that but I won't put money on it!

[G Cantstandya]

Please tell me this is just a rumor....

A pilot acting as a FA, how degrading (no offence to cc.)

Surely the pilot group and AIPA would not allow this under any circumstance!!

[Howard Hughes]

Your employed as a pilot not a flight attendant.
Can't say I have ever had a flying job where competency in operating exits was not in the job description...:rolleyes:

[Keg]

Not 'acting as a FA' per se, acting as a door primary which to me is just one aspect of 'acting as a FA'. There is no service involved at all which to me is a significant part of 'acting as a FA'.

[xer]

Good question for AIPA. I havent got the EBA on me but do our duties include working as a member of the cabin crew?

[breakfastburitto]

Does the door primary have to do a safety demo in their zone...?
Noice

[Capt Wally]

.....hey what's all the fuss here??/.............we have been doing this sort of thing in one form or another (hosty stuff) as single pilot ops from day one !!!
More whittling away of T&C's for the flight crew, next thing ya will know is that the Capt will have to get his own coffee !!!!.heaven forbid !:}

new times ahead !

CW:)

[Lodown]

Seems to be an acknowledgement that the SO isn't necessary as part of the crew, but just there as an added extra taking up room in the cockpit. Do this just once and it's permission for it to occur regularly. Next step: pull the SO out altogether. Who's letting this rubbish get through the filter in QF and CASA? Either the aircraft needs a SO full time or it doesn't. There's no part time SO, part time CC. If a SO is not needed, then get rid of the position, save a few bucks and sell the extra capacity.

[Kanga767]

commercial pressures now take (s) priority over having the extra TRAINED pair of eyes and ears (on the flight deck)

Why not? Seems to be acceptable on the ramp...

K

[QFinsider]

Ah another example of the brilliance of QF.

Major in minor things.

I wonder how it affects duty time calculations on those lightly crewed flights, perhaps heading to the UK in northern summers from a northern Asian port.

Sort of like justifying putting new hire training S/O's in Y class for their rest periods as they aren't part of the operating crew....Of course they were to be upgraded if COMMERCIAL sale of a J/P class seat meant one was vacant.

Where is AIPA?

It sure aint what it used to be......

[Capt Kremin]

My guess is that AIPA wasn't even consulted. Typical of this management, they think they can vary employment conditions on a whim and will no doubt react with feigned surprise when the phone call comes through on Tuesday morning.

[QFinsider]

And naturally given the fact it is an additional duty, it will attract an extra payment.

[anthonyjohnson]

I Recon Its Agood Think .

The F/o To Be Might Even Have Clue What Goes On Down The Back And Grow Up A Bit .

Do You Really Think You Need Three Human Brains At Cridical Times On A Boeing -- I Dont Thnk So -- Even The Spae Set Of Hands Will Get In The Way -- The Only Good Reason For A S/o Is So The Capt Can Get A Nap

[SeldomFixit]

Without malice, a straw poll of Pilot's generally would probably show that there are no tasks they don't feel capable of conducting. The reality is that most would, if asked.

[VH-JJW]

No one has mentioned the fact that there is a de-markation issue here.

Do QF pilots wish to repeat history by interventing in Cabin crew disputes?

Last time the cc went on strike QF pilots intervened en masse to man doors and keep the airline flying.

Some say this was the cause of the atrocious relationship which exists between QF tech and Cabin crew.

AIPA should stand tough on this one.

[funbags]

anthony,

Are you for real?

S/O's over the years have stopped many a more serious incident from occurring, when things have gone wrong in an aircraft.

I know I would much rather have a S/O on the flight deck when a heavyweight RTO occurs out of LAX (to monitor correct actions like speed brake up, full reverse, braking etc) rather than sitting on his bum at R4 looking at the passengers. :ugh:

So yes, the more sets of eyes on the flight deck, the better.

Anyway, I think your post is a gee-up judging by your spelling, grammar and use of capital letters.

[Howard Hughes]

I know I would much rather have a S/O on the flight deck when a heavyweight RTO occurs out of LAX (to monitor correct actions like speed brake up, full reverse, braking etc)
I have two questions!

1. How often do Qantas have an RTO? I mean a 'full on' V1-20 knots or less, not one where you realise that something is not quite right prior to 80 knots!

I have been invloved in two RTO's in my lifetime, one as a passenger and one as operating crew, on both occasions the problem was recognised very early in the take off roll and the aircraft were pulled up with minimum braking.

2. Secondly what is the PNF (or whatever it is called at QF) doing while all this is going on? Surely it is their responsibilty to monitor braking, reverse, speed brakes, etc...

While I agree that an extra set of eyes will always be an asset, it is important to remember that these aircraft are designed to be flown with two pilots!

My personal opinion is that it would be both safe and fall within the area of expertise and responsibilty of the S/O, however I do agree the situation is probably not 'ideal' or 'right' from a human resources perspective, which probably brings up the question, in the event of an evacuation initiated by cabin crew (as in the recent BA example), who would be in control/command of the cabin? CSM, or S/O?:eek:

[stubby jumbo]

........' also the latest rumour is that F/A's are now going to be multiskilled/multi endorsed to act as S/O's as well.

All priddy easy really ........sit in the back seat , Take tea and coffee orders for the F/O and Capt , Radio in the "requirements" for the next sector, and occasionally sit in the LH seat post/prior 5000' to refine their playstation skills !!!!

The cost savings will be immense and the corresponding added bonus' will put a smile on any QF exec's dial.

I too have serious issues with the demarkation argument.

Next we'll have the Capt coming down the back during the Economy meal service barking out:

"OK....which one of youse want Chicken or Beef ?"

[funbags]

"1. How often do Qantas have an RTO? I mean a 'full on' V1-20 knots or less, not one where you realise that something is not quite right prior to 80 knots!"

One high speed quite recently where all 4 crew missed a couple of the RTO actions. People do carry around tiredness in the long haul operation and the more crew monitoring the situaton on the flight deck the better.

I'm not saying you always need 3 or 4 crew. Of course it's a 2 pilot aeroplane. I just know where I would prefer to have the extra set of eyes sitting, and it's not at R4!

Surely you can't condone using pilots as flight attendants. My worry is Qantas may use this more than for what it is intended. I don't think the flight attendants would be overly in favour of this either!

[ITCZ]

It does say that it requires....

Captain, Duty Captain and CASA approval
That is where you can stop the nonsense. Captains, just say "I need all my pilots on the flight deck during departures and arrivals". The answer is still in the hands of the PIC.

Along with... "No, Mrs Dixon cannot have the jumpseat. We have a busy day (discussing EBA issues!)"

;)

[apache]

Not 'acting as a FA' per se, acting as a door primary which to me is just one aspect of 'acting as a FA'. There is no service involved at all....

......YET !

[pill]

And the limitation section states the minimum number of pilots is 2, right. Whats your problem? At cx relief crew will sit in empty cabin crew seats for t/o and ldg to make way for jump seat pax occasonaly. It sucks, but it gets the jump seaters on. Maybe qf so's contribute more to the t/o and ldg than ours. I always thought relief crew were there to allow for an extension of the flight/duty limits. Just looking at it from the outside.

[QFinsider]

Edited for clarity.

FAM section 6.3
Flight deck duty- As this relates, itis the time during which the S/O (or inflight relief) is deemed off duty for flight deck duty limits. They are deemed off duty for take off, climb and descent and landing.

Notwithstanding this limitation, having a pilot sitting on the flight deck doing duties associated with employment is duty time.
To imply that the pilot is therefore "off duty" during this period implies as per the CAO 48 he is actually resting. Is the pilot sitting in the crew rest? Is the pilot sitting in P class in a rest seat?

Now the pilot is to be sitting on a door acting as a primary. Thus to suggest he is actually "resting" for the purposes of flight and duty limitations is ridiculous.

[mustafagander]

QFinsider, I think you are misreading the CA. TOD limit with 3 pilots is 14 hours scheduled, extendable (by each individual pilot) to 16 hours in the event of delays etc. Duty time starts at sign on. This means for LHR-BKK in summer, given a 12:00 (say) flight plan, if there is a 10 minute slot time delay any pilot can refuse to go because taxi times each end will certainly take the TOD over 14:00.

[bb744]

Also, on a tightly scheduled tour of duty, how does this affect flight deck duty times?:ugh::=:rolleyes::*

[Spaz Modic]

:uhoh: Is it right it was suggested to QF by the AIPA? :confused:

[teresa green]

One weak white tea thanks.

[QFinsider]

mustafagander,

I edited the post for clarity.
The arguement that the relief pilot is off duty for calculation of limitations is the point in question. Considering an S/O off duty whilst sitting working on the flight deck simply as he does not occupy the control seat clouds the logic of duty associated with employment. This is where the CAO is clear. To now state that the pilot is perform statuatory duties in the cabin removes any doubt as to the not on duty (hence resting) arguement..

I also have issues with the certified agreement being amended, unilaterally. AGAIN

[rmcdonal]

So doesn't this mean that the flight would still be short 1 Cabin Crew for the whole flight? Therefore the other CC would have to work harder to fill in for the missing CC. I would want a bonus for that.:eek:

[capt.cynical]

What generally happens when one CC short is that the CSM & CSS take up the slack by not having proper crew rest.:(

[lowerlobe]

I can see the insidious nature of the company bean counters and managers at work ......yet again.

If this is just not rumour #384,275,294, I believe this is the latest in another bonus orientated idea to cut costs through reducing cabin crew numbers.

If it is true and the fact that the L/H cabin crew have just agreed to a huge savings in cost to the company through the latest EBA then it is a huge slap in the face for all those who want to work with the company.

Is this an insight into the company's idea for cutting crew numbers on the A-380?

If it is true it will be interesting to see if the FAAA does anything about it....

As well, it has been pointed out by others that another set of eyes and ears on the flight deck is invaluable as well as a method of helping to reduce crew fatigue.

I sincerely hope that this is just another wind up......

[mustafagander]

QFInsider, it is ONLY the "flight deck duty" limit which is affected by where the S/O might happen to find him/herself on the aircraft or indeed anywhere Charlie Q may wish to send him/her.

The duty clock starts running at scheduled or actual (if later than sched) sign on time, end of story. Early Antarctica charters had an early sign on (paid) to allow for the cold weather survival briefing before the flight, if I remember correctly.

[Transition Layer]

lowerlobe, it is true...have seen the FSO with my own two eyes. It provided quite a laugh at briefing (well for the Captain and F/O anyway!).

According to a CSM I spoke to about it, the new A330-200s are the issue here. 8 Crew members and 8 doors (unlike the -300 which has also 8 doors but 10 crew). If one crew member goes sick upline (Mumbai would have to be the obvious one!) then they can get themselves out of there without delaying the service. Obviously the more sensible option would be to roster 9 crew and god forbid, increase the level of service at the same time!!!

All that said and done it's still a crock of **** and they'd have to drag me kicking and screaming down to man a door if it was required, at which point I'd suddenly and amazingly develop the same stomach bug that caused the flight attendant not to fly in the first place and demand to get off the aircraft. ;)

TL

[strobe12]

maybe they can use the second s/o who paxes home on the mumbai flight whilst the operating crew do an all nighter with 3 guys.....:hmm:

all to save about 2hrs o/t. If that was the -400 there would be a HUGE FUSS made cause god-forbid anything should happen to the crew of the flagship :rolleyes:

on that note, when the A380 comes in will this take over as "the" fleet, maybe knock for -400 guys down a peg or to :ok:

[QFcaptain]

":ugh::ugh:, How can you let that happen, what sort of union do u have in QF,
I have never ever heard something like that, and we are talkin of QF. I hope I never hear it again. I think you guys shoud do something serious about that. Theres no words to describe how downgrading. (and Im not discriminating FA,s, I just think everyone does what there job is, and thats it)

Good Luck, and my support on it too,

B.F"


I honestly do think that we should stand against this immediately.QF Pilots??anyone done anything yet.This shouldn't even live out 24hrs ithout being thrashed.If this happens at a major airline like QF then whats gona be with the smaller carriers.Seriously:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[QF DRIVE]

Does it work in reverse. If a SO goes sick, get a CC to do the SO job. Its much the same.

[Capt Fathom]

when the A380 comes in will this take over as "the" fleet, maybe knock for -400 guys down a peg or to

Someone mentioned previously the relationship between the pilots & cabin crew.

According to Strobie, doesn't look like the relationship between the pilots is much better!

Must be a great place to work....:uhoh:

[2p!ssed2drive]

guys...... it says -

QUOTE: In exceptional circumstances





How often are exceptional circumstances going to crop up???????????

[virgindriver]

"exceptional"

I bet once it starts happening there won't be any looking back. :)

Sign of the times.

[QFcaptain]

"How often are exceptional circumstances going to crop up???????????"

That totally defeats the point.
It should never ever come to that and it shouldn't even come up as an idea.The Pilots are there to do their job, it is what they are employed as and it is the job/career they chose to do and not anything else.If this starts happening at all, doesn't matter if it's once a month or once every 2years.It will eventually become the norm and it will be an accepted part of the job which is totally degrading.I don't think I have to specify the point here when I'm sure it's quite clear but you as Captains should be trying to better things for the younger generation and try and improve the moral and make it a better respected proffession.Just because you may be retiring in 2years, shouldn't excuse you from taking any action.You know that you would've wanted the same thngs being done for you if you were a Pilot that was just coming up and had a long and hopefully bright future ahead of them.Actions should be taken and not "having a laugh in the cockpit when the report comes in" and laughing down onto the S/O.You were once a S/O yourself, back your proffession.Demand respect.If ever this is the time now to demand your respect as a Pilot and act!don't just say someone else will do it anyway, because they probaby won't, Their Pilots for goods sake.Do something.

This just makes me :yuk: and :bored:

[Scarybus]

QFcaptain,

Sounds like your user name precedes you???? At least be 'professional' and spell it right! Don't mean to be downgrading or was that degrading???

[lowerlobe]

A senior 767 capt was telling me about being on holidays in Europe and flying on a one class 767.

His seat was in the back row and he hadn't been down past the tech crew rest for years let alone been there for take off and landing.

He was surprised at how noisy and bumpy the take off and landing was and asked the cabin crew on that flight if that was normal....

Xatrix......I'd like to hear the call back after the arm the doors PA is made....

[distracted cockroach]

Agree with the call...."what sort of union have you guys got?...."
Oh yes, the type that has let Jetconnect and Jetstar take over the Tasman and Jetstar most of the domestic flying....oh and the 787s?
This issue is just small fry in comparison.....
Just the way it looks from the outside.
DC

[Short_Circuit]

Sounds like the old Qantas, trust me guys it is just a once only, it will not continue, believe me.:mad:

[Capt Kremin]

Like many of the posts here, we start with a small kernel of truth and leaven it with four tonnes of hyperbole.

The story will come out and for once it seems that the Company wasn't trying to pull a swifty. I will leave it at that.
This situation will be sorted out to the satisfaction of all concerned... pilots... cabin crew...Qantas and CASA.

[DutchRoll]

Perhaps, Kremin, but I've read the FSO more than once, and it is not exactly the most well thought out thing I've ever laid eyes on.

It applies to ALL crew. Not just S/Os. If you're an F/O or Captain operating as a 3rd crewmember, guess what? The policy could apply to you! The policy also applies to all mainline types. How the heck can that work? When did we start using 3 pilot crews on the 737? Also, where does this leave an S/O, for example, in the chain of command? One minute he's answering to the CSM and obeying his directives - the next minute he's directing the CSM what to do by delegation of the Captain or as the third in command! How are some going to take that ("no, you're L4 primary, I'm giving the orders here!"). And what exactly are "exceptional circumstances". In my experience, "exceptional circumstances" are invoked virtually every time a flight is threatened with a delay or cannot be crewed for whatever reason.

To be honest, it really is a crock (the way it's written). Very poorly thought out - just as I'd expect. Nor could I envisage any captain I've flown with in recent times agreeing to it, apart perhaps from the very small minority who are eagerly climbing the management ladder.

[max autobrakes]

Does this now mean that the poor S/O who was blamed in a big way on the Qantas 1, "hole in One" in BKK will now be totally exonerated?

After all this STUPID FSO shows that Management obviously think that S/O's are only there for decoration and are not really required on the flight deck except for in flight relief.

PROFITABILITY, BEFORE SAFETY ,BEFORE SCHEDULE!
When will these pelicans in management actually start managing?:suspect:

[blow.n.gasket]

Actually Max,
this has "Wedge Politics Manning" (poorly) written all over it.
What exactly are the legalities here?
The silence from CASA is deafening!
I suspect a trap is being laid here with management expecting AIPA to come out all guns blazing and then hit them with costly court action during EBA negotiating time, I could be wrong, but......
I hear AIPA is doing due dilligence on this issue before taking a considered stance.
This is all thanks to that wonderful bit of Industrial Legislation by Jackboot Johny.
Every Union in this day and age really does need to dot their i's and cross their t's.

[drshmoo]

CASA has given some woofull dispensations in recent times. Jetstar A330 with no crew rest. They are all ex QF so would have had crew rest I assume. My mates admit that they get really crappy rest sitting with the pax. I know QF A330s signed off on the 4th crew member for a similar deal sitting business with the punters but thats for only 8 months.

QF group does what they want, when they want with our governing body at the moment so this crew member operating the doors number not raising an eye from CASA does not surprise me in the slightest

[OhSpareMe]

You should never assume Drshmoo. The 4 x A330-200 transferred temporarily to Jetstar were never fitted out with a dedicated Tech Crew Rest.

[Poto]

You should never assume Drshmoo. The 4 x A330-200 transferred temporarily to Jetstar were never fitted out with a dedicated Tech Crew Rest.

"Temporarily"

You should never assume OSM:E

[OhSpareMe]

They were transferred temporarily to Jetstar. At this time that remains their official status.:{

I am not in the business of crystal ball gazing.:p

[drshmoo]

Were EBA, EBB etc fitted with rests before they went to Jet*?

[OhSpareMe]

No.

Don't know about EBE and EBF - the additional two A330-200 ordered directly to Jetstar.

[max autobrakes]

Here is the literary gem ,
judge for yourself.




No: 009/08
Date: 25/1/08
FLIGHT STANDING ORDER OPERATIONS Cancels: NIL
FSO Applicability: All Aircraft Page 1
ALL AIRCRAFT
MINIMUM OPERATING CABIN CREW
Background:
The Cabin Crew (Cabin Attendant) complement may be varied due to an unplanned Cabin Crew shortfall (eg. upline sickness). As a minimum, there must be at least one Cabin Attendant for each unit of 36 passengers, with not less than one Cabin Attendant for each floor level exit in any cabin with two aisles.
In the majority of circumstances, Cabin Crew shortfalls will be managed in accordance with FAM 18.2.2 ‘Minimum Operating Cabin Crew’. This will involve operating the service with a reduced passenger load. CASA have indicated that under exceptional circumstances, Flight Crew may form part of the Cabin Crew complement, as Flight Crew are qualified in the execution of evacuation procedures.
Currently there is no documented procedure in place for Flight Crew to form part of the Cabin Crew complement. The following policy will be included in the next revision of the FAM.
Policy:
• The minimum number of Cabin Crew outlined in FAM18.2.2 is only to be applied at ports where no additional Cabin Crew are available. A minimum of one crew member must operate in each Primary position.
• In exceptional circumstances, relief Flight Crew members may form part of the Cabin Crew complement during takeoff and landing. This may prevent having to operate the service with a reduced passenger load.
• Prior to this occurring, the Operating Captain must contact the IOC. A decision will then be made in consultation with the Duty Captain, Cabin Crew management and CASA.
• If approved, the relief Flight Crew member shall request a briefing from the CSM on Door Primary responsibilities and duties.
• An adjustment to the cabin service may be necessary.




I wonder what the CASA indication was?
Didn't actually object when some hypothetical bullsh!te situation was casually mentioned over a boozy lunch?

[peanut pusher]

After 3 years of watching many SO's spending their whole break time in the cabin and galley trying to "tune" a young LHR loverly for a slip port bedroom rumble.

Management thought they save you some rest time and put you straight into the action.

[strobe12]

" After 3 years of watching many SO's spending their whole break time in the cabin and galley trying to "tune" a young LHR loverly for a slip port bedroom rumble.

Management thought they save you some rest time and put you straight into the action."

Thats gotta be one of the best posts about this subject! :D

Your not management are ya dood? For sure to be soon though with ideas like that, well done that man:ok:

[airtags]

consultation is a wonderful thing - esp on the Friday before a long weekend!

I would not imagine for a minute that this would sit comfortably with any crew regardless of status (unless of course you're doing a evac out of Afganistan on Christmas Eve...is that what they meant by 'exceptional'!!!!!)


I can just see a keen 20 year old SO head to head with one of the old girls regarding who is in command in the cabin ...could be a whole new meaning to CRM

[RedTBar]

I can just see a keen 20 year old SO head to head with one of the old girls regarding who is in command in the cabin ..

Seems to be a common topic in this thread but to be honest I don't think there would be any conflict at all.There must be some fragile ego's around.

But it reminds me of a joke.

What is the last thing a pilot does before boarding a raft after a ditching?

Takes off his/her epaulets:E

[mrpaxing]

its a gigantic joke. where is the faaa on this subject. they should consult with AIPA and knock that one straight back. we know the Qf subsidery in canberra, formerly known as CASA is becoming more and more a massive joke.
time for the new minister to take the broom and clean out. amazes me that commercial consideration are more important to casa then anything to do with safety.

[Capt Fathom]

But it reminds me of a joke.

What is the last thing a pilot does before boarding a raft after a ditching?

Takes off his/her epaulets

:confused: Why would he/she do that?

[QFinsider]

Here is the reply of the emperor..

Thank you to those members who have brought to my attention concerns that the cabin crew complement may be varied due to unplanned exceptional circumstances to include pilots. Since being made aware of the situation I have spoken to the Chief Pilot and the FAAA Divisional Secretary and I am assured that the FSO was only written because the decision to utilise the third flight crew member to cover the absence of a flight attendant occurred without the necessary approval. There is no desire to make this a common practice.

Nevertheless, prima facie neither AIPA nor the FAAA International Division have any unresolvable difficulty with S/Os being used to meet minimum cabin crew numbers in unforeseen and/or unusual exceptional circumstances - provided the required approvals and agreements are in place. I have written to all concerned to discuss, and if thought fit, will ultimately agree the necessary Memorandum of Agreement. However, until you are formally advised by AIPA that all is in order, I strongly recommend that no member make up the shortfall in the number of cabin crew required without first obtaining the consent of both Qantas and AIPA.


I suspect this guy is busy playing the same fiddle as Dixon whilst the empire burns.
As I understand it NO consultation took place with the COM..
He is PRIMA FACIE behaving like a PRIMA DONA.


And for the record am not a member of the Com..

[RedTBar]

It's a bludge so why not make the most of it and tune up one of the birds for the layover - if you can find one under thirty who isn't a peanut-mover or whatever.

Touche,Eclan.But if you guys can send down a similar under thirty well built female s/o we would appreciate it.

As I said before I agree with you about any cabin leadership conflict that some suggest might happen.

So if the s/o wants to do the pa's,handle upgrade request,deal with ife and seat problems or in a lousy situation carry out a full evac then I am more than happy to let them do it.

Especially as it is obviously a bludge as you so eloquently put it.

QFinsider,
I agree with you because how many times has this company come up with their own interpretation of an issue.If someone in both unions believe that on face value the company has no further plans to make the most out of this FSO then I guess a few people have not learnt from history.

[airtags]

I hear it's game over for this FSO
well done to the FAAA & APIA reps who scrummed down

[Shazz-zaam]

If the FSO has been cancelled ,the Genius working in the office who thought it up should get a swift kick up the behind:ok:

[QFinsider]

I think the demise of the FSO is premature.

I sincerely hope it is gone, however it still shows up on the intranet..........:rolleyes:

[RedTBar]

That's not what you thought was going to happen, was it?

Yes the SO could've chosen hostiehood as a living

hostiehood ??????? WTF.
Does that mean there is a pilothood???

Sounds more than a little misogynistic to me

when instructed by the capt and then shout at the punters. Not that hard, even your newest cadet SO could manage it, I suspect.

Actually,I doubt many pilots would have the temperament for the job.

sitting next to a door. It IS a bludge. Just sit there. And tune.

Tell that to the BA cabin crew who were on the 777 the other day.Just don't be next to any of them when you say it.

[Capt Fathom]

So if the s/o wants to do the pa's,handle upgrade request,deal with ife and seat problems or in a lousy situation carry out a full evac then I am more than happy to let them do it.

Actually Eclan, it's what most GA pilots do before joining an airline!

It's what I do as a full time job .. as well as fly the aeroplane! :uhoh:

Oops. I forgot the catering. I pick that up on the way to work. :E

[RedTBar]

Actually Eclan, it's what most GA pilots do before joining an airline!
It's what I do as a full time job .. as well as fly the aeroplane!
Oops. I forgot the catering.
don't forget pumping the fuel yourself... rest assured, many years spent doing that in my earlier career stages, too. Most airline pilots the same apart from cadets and ex-RAAF.
yeah,I know what you mean guys.
A good mate of mine drives big trucks,B doubles and he does the same.
Refuelling,catering,loading and securing your cargo,all the paperwork,driving and radio calls,long days,huge hours and in all sorts of weather and all on your own.
Yep,you guys do it tough.

[Angle of Attack]

Well back to the topic I dont think anyone should be arguing about doing each others jobs in detail, its only about sitting at a door for T/O and landing and purely the safety aspects ie an evacuation or the such. I would hope any S/O whether brand new cadet or crusty old one could do that competently, they all have done EP's after all! I hope this gets withdrawn, if there is a shortfall of cabin crew for any reason, thats tough luck for the company, up to them to get another one or offload pax IMO. The more eyes up the front for takeoff the landing the better... well my 2 cents worth, probably 4 cents worth these days for inflation...:rolleyes:

[RedTBar]

I could not agree more Angle of Attack and all crew would much prefer to have tech crew where they are supposed to be.An extra pair of eyes on the flight deck is like insurance.
The bottom line is that if the company wants to operate with the minimum cabin crew then they have to accept the consequences when something like up line sickness happens.

[Aussie Fo]

The issue here is not what they are planning but what's the next step?

Take this as a hypothesis.

........ Scene Cabin Services monthly meeting........

Hey i just thought of this we can do a service with two crew less, its takes 20 minutes more but we can do it and it saves Cabin Services 10 million a year in reduced crewing costs etc.....i'll tell you about it for a bonus.

Bring Bring

"Hello DCPFO speaking"

"Hi DCPFO we have worked out a way we can save 10 million a year but are wondering do you have two spare EPs trained crew you can do without for To and LDG?"

Call me cynical but this is very tongue in cheek

"Oh and you get 5% of the saving"

"Why yes i do as a matter of fact"

All of a sudden we have SO always in the cabin, after all climb and descent are not included in their flight times anyway! By LAW

Where does it stop.

WE JUST LOST SAFETY IN LATE NIGHT DEPARTURES IN HOW MANY FLIGHTS A DAY?

Someone needs to have the balls to say no!

[airtags]

certainly beware the precedent in EVERYTHING however....the intel is that this FSO will be killed off - the only a/c really at risk (and the a/c in the incident which was the precipe for the FSO in the first place) is the 330-200...... 8 x doors and 8 x crew.

Info from the Mrs: I'm told that the routes flown and the nature the cabin service requirements (36 J) will result in a more sensible allocation of the additional crew member in the cabin.

In the meantime until the FSO is pulled, I'm sure there wouldn't be anything "extraordinary" enough that would not warrant waiting for a replacement CC to pax in.

SO pls remain in your seat.

[Keg]

...after all climb and descent are not included in their flight times anyway! By LAW

Incorrect. It does count towards flight time. Climb and descent does not count towards flight deck duty time which is a completely separate kettle of fish and is essentially irrelevant in four crew ops anyway. It would perhaps play a part in a three pilot ops flight but only at the extremes of flight times....about 12 hours.

[mrpaxing]

akl-lax-akl and syd-mum-syd ,new A330-200 with 8 crew. that would save them a j/c seat for t/o and ldg which they could sell to some other staffy for t/o & ldg and then stand for the rest of the sector.
more bonuses:yuk::yuk::yuk:

[lemel]

i think this is a bad move. dont we want the so at the front with the other flight crew. as has been posted before "an extra set of eyes is always a plus". in addition, the so is new to the game, shouldn't he or she be there observing and contributing during the most critical phases of the flight???:ugh:

[Keg]

I spotted this in a company document written by the Chief Pilot:

...an operating crew took it upon themselves to use a Pilot in the cabin for takeoff and landing due to a shortfall in Cabin Crew numbers. This course of action would not have been agreed to by management if contact had been made. It has never been the intention to use such a procedure to solve day-to-day operational issues. The FSO was issued to
stop Flight Crew taking it upon themselves to use this procedure. I hope this clears up the various conspiracy theories.

I hope my highlighted bit has been defined and enshrined in stone somewhere! :eek:

Of course it also begs the question of why couldn't this kind of background have been included in the FSO to start off with! It would have saved a considerable amount of angst! :rolleyes: :ugh:

[G-ZUZZ]

Sounds like a BS back-down. Has anone ever heard of this event having taken place?

No?

Management reverse their position and spin a could of BS to cover their tracks:

"It has never been the intention......"

Ri-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight..........:rolleyes:

[Keg]

I've heard of it being discussed before- particularly in the old days to get extra staff travelers on the flight deck- but never heard of it actually happening to cater for crew illness.

[NO LAND 3]

Ah - the old "extra pair of eyes" sentiment. I've operated 2 pilot, 3 pilot, 4 pilot, single pilot, 2 pilot 1 eng, and ummm...3 pilot 2 eng.
Extra pilots are to extend allowable duty times. My experience is that in airliners designed for two pilots, extra pilots sitting in the jumpseats are often as much a distraction as an asset. Historically we have no higher incident rate on our two pilot operations than with four.
I presume QF operate with more than minimum cabin crew (ie in my current airline we usually operate the 777 -300 with 14 - 16 crew vs the minimum requirement for door coverage of 10). So it would have to be very exceptional circumstances for an augmenting pilot to assist with door coverage.
Think about it: why be stuck in some crappy outstation waiting for a replacement crewmember when there is someone perfectly capable of covering a door sitting in a cockpit jumpseat?
Bit hysterical guys.

[rockarpee]

No land 3 in Qantas we operate with minimum crew. Big problem occurs on the A330.200, 8 doors 8 crew. on the 767.300GE 7 crew total for 4 main exits and 4 overwing exits. 767.300RR 8 crew total for 8 exits. I have no idea about 747.400 but I know it is minimal. :uhoh:

[NO LAND 3]

Ha ha, you third world airlines! I had no idea. Does throw a different light on it and I can see there must be other issues behind the scenes. Pardon my intrusion into a sensitive area.

[rockarpee]

Funnily enough its the third world airlines that are able to load up the cabin with zillions of crew.:rolleyes: Problem is here in QF it wouldn't matter how cheap we got the labour, it'd still be min crew.:ugh::ugh: