EZY flight off due to 'expired licence'

[wasaspacecadet]

As humble SLF, I add no comment, but found this and thought it of interest.

easyJet flight cancelled after pilot's licence expires - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/2478604/easyJet-flight-cancelled-after-pilots-licence-expires.html)

Spacey

[fireflybob]

It's to easy (sorry about the pun) to just say the pilot "had forgotten to renew his licence". This is a joint responsibility between the pilot and the company. All the companies I know of issue timely reminders but this sounds like an error in administration.

Also are Easy that short of standby cover that the flight had to be cancelled?

[A Very Civil Pilot]

It happens every now and again (alsoe with medicals, LCPs etc).

Imagine if it was the other way round - 'Exclusive: Airline pilot with expired licence flies holiday jet. Narrowly misses school*. Full story pages 3,4,5,8,10,11.'






[* 'Narrowly misses school' is obligatory in any aviation news story]

[Smudger]

Fireflybob,

It is not a 'joint responsibility' to maintain licence validity, this responsibility lies with the licence holder alone. Any decent company however will have a system in place to remind the individual that a certain element of his licence is due for renewal as it is obviously in their interest to make sure that the employee remains employable at all times. Nonetheless if you hold a licence it is up to you and you alone to ensure that it remains valid.

[BYALPHAINDIA]

The Telegraph 'licenced' to print 'Rubbish':=

Do we know for sure if there is (any) evidence of truth about the licence??

[Caudillo]

I agree with FFB. As a result of the expired licence, although for all the difference it makes it might as well have been through sickness, there was a lack of crew to fly the sector. That's the responsibility of the company non?

Never mind, I can see a special dispensation coming soon to a part A near you...

[muppet]

Sounds a little odd: surely they would have standby, and if short of crew just use the next crew and back fill ?

[fireflybob]

Fireflybob,

It is not a 'joint responsibility' to maintain licence validity, this responsibility lies with the licence holder alone. Any decent company however will have a system in place to remind the individual that a certain element of his licence is due for renewal as it is obviously in their interest to make sure that the employee remains employable at all times. Nonetheless if you hold a licence it is up to you and you alone to ensure that it remains valid.

Smudger, yes from a legal standpoint I am aware of this and I agree with you but I believe there is also an onus on the operator to ensure their crews are operating legally.

Slightly off thread but several years ago a couple of pilots for a UK airline exceeded 100 hours in 28 days. Both the pilots AND the operator were (successfully) taken to court by the Authority.

If a pilot is flying with an invalid licence I still think the operator has some accountability.

[StudentInDebt]

It is not a 'joint responsibility' to maintain licence validity, this responsibility lies with the licence holder alone.Whilst there is a personal responsibility on the part of the licence holder to make sure they are valid I think there is a joint legal responsibility and this has been written into the Part A for both companies I've worked for no doubt sourced from EU-OPS:
EU-OPS 1.940
(a) An operator shall ensure that:
(3) All flight crew members hold an applicable and valid licence acceptable to the Authority and are suitably qualified
and competent to conduct the duties assigned to them;

[Smudger]

OK chaps I'll look into it if I get the time but I'm certain that you can't blame your company if you are ramp checked and grounded because your licence has lapsed. (Moral;- keep your licence valid!).

[kick the tires]

OK chaps I'll look into it if

Smudger, why not just thank StudentInDebt for the reference he has given??

Not really much to 'look into'!:confused::confused::confused:

[Groundloop]

The story says "200 passengers". According to Airbus the 321 can seat up to 199 pax. Do easy cram in more?

Also if it was an ex-GB 321 there may not be all that many crews cleared on it (if some GB crews jumped ship before the merger). You can't just take someone of a standard easy 319 and stick them in a 321 just like that.

[fmgc]

I used fly A321s with 220 PAX seats.

[Checkboard]

Having just had to renew my JAR licence myself, it should be pointed out that this a stupid requirement!

My Australian ATPL is permanent (i.e. never has to be renewed), and the validity is simply based on a valid medical, and a passed check within the last year. Paying a load of cash to the UK CAA, just for someone to press the "print" button on the computer to renew a licence for another five years is a complete waste of time and money.

[Lauderdale]

Apparantly plenty of flight crew looking for o/t that day, however ezy decided to canx service, which really cheered up the returning pax (There's your £89 Sir, enjoy your extended stay on the island! Any complaints please contact easyjet.com).

[kick the tires]

Lauderdale says:

Apparantly plenty of flight crew looking for o/t that day

Shows what a lack of credibility your posts have - there is no such agreement nor system at easyJet.

Dont believe all you hear and we wont believe all you post! Deal?:D

[Stop Stop Stop]

To add to the debate, it most certainly IS the responsibility of the pilot to maintain his own licence. In my company, we all had to renew our ATPL's last year as we were issued with JAA licences from a company bulk application five years previously. This time it was our responsibilty and it was made perfectly clear that we had to make a timely application. The company were aware of our expiry dates and we were issued with several written reminders enclosing CAA application forms and even a text message reminder to the company mobile. Really no excuse to get it wrong!

[Smudger]

Thank you Student. Kick - happy now? Stop - thank you.

[point8six]

CHECKBOARD - suggest you never apply for a CAA Singapore licence, which until recently required renewing every 6 months. It is now every year!

[Just Browsing]

Ezy do have a system in place to ensure, as far as possible, that crews do not fly with any required elements expired. Expiring licences, medicals, ratings, SEP items, recencies etc are monitored and flagged up automatically some time before expiry. Emails are normally sent to crew members as reminders for actions they need to take - licences and medicals - but training expiries are normally rostered in good time. Furthemore, at check in, expiry dates are listed and crews are required to confirm that they are correct at valid. Despite all this, people do somehow slip through the system. Perhaps they shouldn't, but they do.

I have no idea whether the former GB pilots are part of this system yet, or whether an existing GB system is in place, but it's pretty poor of the company to relinquish publicly any responsibility for licence validity. It may be an idividual pilot's responisibility to keep him or herself legal, but it's a company's responsibility to ensure that its passengers are flown by qualified, licensed and properly trained crews. That's why they check and hold such details in their files!

JB

[RAT 5]

I thought EZY was a very computer orientated organsiation, or professed to be so. Surely it is not beyond the capability of IT to include an alarm system that when a crew member is rostered for a flight all their legal requirements are checked by the computer and flagged up if not current. This would inlcude all the annual recurrency ground courses as well as sims & medicals. It should be updated very 24 hrs and could run a check during the night.
I've worked for many supposed compter aided airlines, but when it came to using the tool to is true capability they were woefully short. Much pencil & paper work still done = many mistakes which usually have to be sorted out at the last minute much to the anguish of crews with last minute changes.

I am associated with an organistaion which makes a plan for sim use on the computer. Thus it is impossible to double book a sim. However, the crew schedule has to done again in a different format. Guess what; in the transfer of information errors are made. Crews are double booked; insructors not rostered; changes made to one part of the plan, but not conveyed to all links in the chain. It is a classic opportunity for a 'one button' operation. All data is crossed filed as required. No errors, a massive saving in time for the planners, no last minute fire fighting due to cock ups. Head office will not allow it. Crass.

[AMEandPPL]

Head office will not allow it

Probably because it would mean too many Head-office jobs would suddenly be made redundant ! ( admin, bureaucrats, etc ).

[Ancient Observer]

Mr Ezysafety - are you reading this lot? How about clearing up the confusion?

[Lauderdale]

"Lauderdale says:


Quote:
Apparantly plenty of flight crew looking for o/t that day
Shows what a lack of credibility your posts have - there is no such agreement nor system at easyJet.

Dont believe all you hear and we wont believe all you post! Deal?:D"

By no means do I want to turn this into something personal - however Kick, I am more embedded within ezy then you would could ever think. My post was meant to state that any inconvenience to the slf caused was more down to ezy £££ than anything else. As far as the credibility of my posts are concerned I suggest you read the history of my postings first before you come to a rather pathetic conclusion. Apologies accepted btw. :ugh:

[stator vane]

funny how that slipped by without any remark--

indeed a silly requirement, but i suppose the entire airspace over the UK and Europe would come to a complete halt. and the streets would be filled with UK CAA'ers selling the latest Big Issue!!!

the US licences are the same. and on top of that are the size of a credit card.

here, they have to make a book!!!!

[Lauderdale]

What are you implying wingandprayer?

[Lauderdale]

"As an aside, the cabin crew, and a fair few of them, do call in sick on a regular basis. That is FACT!"

Are you reffering to ex GB cc specifically wingandparyaer or the whole ezy operation as a whole? Would you mind just clarifying this?


Now remember, get your facts straight because I will quite happily 'enlighten' you with some inside facts and figures in regards to what you are implying!

:=

[Airbrake]

Lauderdale.

I can assure you that a few Easy CC have very high sickness rates when it comes to the weekend, that is fact and unfortunately it is human nature. This minority would be the same in any company, they don't care if they stitch up their friends or colleagues as long as they get their Friday/Saturday night off.

They are the facts now please enlighten me with your inside facts and figures!

[Lauderdale]

So Airbrake - what you are saying is that the ex GB cc within ezy have a higher proportion of sickness than say the LGW based ezy contingent of cc?

Because that is what is being implied here........

[Airbrake]

Don't know anything about Ex GB Crew sickness rates at Easyjet. Purely commenting on a minority of Easyjet Crew. However, as you mentioned GB crew I am sure just like every group of people you will get the very good, and the not so good.

So what are your inside facts and figures? We are all waiting for them.

[Lauderdale]

Airbrake:
So what are your inside facts and figures? We are all waiting for them.


Airbrake - please read previous postings before you get your knickers in a twist:

As an aside, the cabin crew, and a fair few of them, do call in sick on a regular basis. That is FACT!

I get the feeling that the poster of the above quote is implying that GB cc have a higher '"sickness"' (read: taking the proverbial Michael) rate than the main body of ezy crew and therefore are having an affect on ezy operations, this is within the spirit of this thread.

Actually at LGW it is the other way round (only marginally though), however that is not what we are talking about here.

The issue is the integrity of GB crew - (not versus ezy crew, before anyone else starts!) which is again within the spirit of this thread as it is being implied that GB crew are undermining the ezy operation - I want to nip that in the bud.

Do you have any reason to believe that this is the case? If not - then you agree with me, great to have you on-board!

:ok:

[Lauderdale]

Wingandprayer.......yes crew operating GB Flights.........exactly that!

Not just GB crew operating GB flights! As I am sure you know a large group of ezy crew are seconded to GB routes (due 320/321) (cabin crew - not flightcrew obviously). Now because the ezy crew are on a much lower basic salary, operating GB flights is costing them a fortune! (long sectors, much less ROI). They are hacked off - and I for one am not surprised they are!

So out of that '73' a very large chunk were ezy crew - and this is exactly what I mean by getting your facts straight!

:ugh:

[Banzai Eagle]

Moving slightly back to the title.
Easy use AIMS and you can set it up to stop crews from flying if for example their OPC has expired. I imagine however it's not linked to licence / passport / medicals etc. From personal experience crewmembers are reminded in plenty of time, chased in plenty of time and 98% complete the task in a timely and organised way. Of the 2% that don't 1% eventually cough up the required copy for records within a week or so of expiry. The last 1% are chased forever and normally the intervention of a Mgmt Pilot does the trick.
At EZY it's probably a full time job reminding / chasing etc.
Out of all the above it's most likely that licences will slip the net due to a 10year expiry, passports don't normally as their is a level of self interest to renew i.e. family hols.
Regretable as the incident was, it was just an admin mistake. Ezy will tighten their procedures but it's nothing that doesn't happen across all UK Airlines.
We all make mistakes just as long as it doesnt happen again :{