Falsification of Flight Crew Duty Hours

[Paul Rice]

I am wondering to what extent individual Captain's or crews working for UK operators have been offered ex gratia payments (cash incentives) to falsify flight crew duty hours. The reason I ask is that it happened to me and I declined the inducement. I was asked to falsify a report time to allow another sector when infact the cabin crew would be running circa 4 1/2 hours into discretion. Having refused to bend the rules and reject the payment my contract was subsequently not renewed. Is this something that just happens and not something to get concerned about. I did raised the matter with CHIRP the CAA and BALPA and I get the feeling no ones that bothered. Having been sacked im very bothered but for furture reference is this something that happens from time to time and in the future would the best plan be to sharped the pencil, shut up and look the other way. Appreciate opinions on this one.

[captplaystation]

You said initially that your contract wasn't renewed, then later you said you were sacked. There is a very big difference here as I am sure you appreciate.
First time I have ever heard of crap like this, of course the normal incentive would be intimidation, lucky you, you were offered financial inducement.
Totally illegal of course, so the advice is simple, do you imagine you will enjoy a court appearance followed by a hefty fine. If not , you have answered your own question.


BTW you are not a journalist in another life are you ? :hmm:

[Pugilistic Animus]

No, you should not look the other way; from what you said however perhaps it's better who knows what or who else the company is overlooking or bribing

I know you want a response from someone in you country but in general it was most likely better off for you, companies like that kill people and go out of business anyway

sorry for what happened:*

PA

[Paul Rice]

Sure felt like being sacked i.e. non renewal of a fixed term contract, when the company was still at the time hiring crew through the agency concerned. I realised that it was totally wrong to except the money to falsify the duty hours. Would infact be a criminal offence. Article 72 ANO offences in relation to documents and records, not to mention endangering safety of an aircraft. Whats annoying is that its not a crime to offer a bribe to falsify duty hours but of course would be a crime to accept or at least thats what the local constabulary has told me. Im not a journalist just an unemployed pilot counting down the days till the cash runs out.

[Airbus Girl]

Never heard of money for doing it, often been asked to "bend the rules" and I know it used to go on (pilots bending the rules) in a previous airline I worked for, but nothing serious, more like changing your report time by 15 minutes to allow you to bring the aircraft home rather than running out of hours and being stuck down route. Or scrubbing the standby you were on and pretending you hadn't really done a morning standby, only ever had the night flight rostered. Or saying that yesterdays standby never existed, it was really a day off, therefore you are legal to help us out today. Things like that. Days off were the usual bribery on offer, although days off payments might have been there too....

Usually real minor stuff though and it was up to you if you did it or not. Never heard of anyone getting sacked for not conforming.

[Koan]

The first thing I tell inquiring strangers regarding safety is to fly a unionized airline. Commercial pressures will not result in violations of flight/duty times at the likes of JL, BA, LH,UA, etc.

[BOAC]

the cabin crew would be running circa 4 1/2 hours into discretion. -sorry, Paul - that does not make sense. Sorry, however, to hear of your predicament. If the company are going to screw you on a reference I would certainly throw '4 1/2 hrs discretion' at the CAA again and ask for an answer in writing. What exactly did BALPA say?

While we are here, does anyone know for certain if a line check Captain is required to be 'in hours' for the flight he is checking? In particular, a level 2 check flight but not Level 2 'rested'? I have been told not and I'm pretty sure that is not correct. Cannot find any clues in JAR/EU Ops.

[captplaystation]

Paul,
I suspect your name was written in the "not flexible" page in the non-existant (purely cerebral ) book that all Crewing Dept's keep. When the time came for renewal ,you paid the price for correct behaviour dealing with some very incorrect people.
Probably not much compensation to you now if you are out of a job, but long term, best out of there. Sound like a real bunch of rogues. :=

Perhaps you may have made more impression if you had approached your company Flt Ops Inspector, rather than the local constabulary, but then again, maybe not :hmm:

[gatbusdriver]

I assume by level 2 you are talking about increasing your allowable duty hours by 1 hour (with max discretion now only 2 hours). If you are not level 2 rested then you cannot use the level 2 variation. So your allowable duty hours are as normal, not like the crew you are checking. Therefore if you are rostered into discretion I would decline the duty. As for a reference......I cannot help.

[sky9]

While we are here, does anyone know for certain if a line check Captain is required to be 'in hours' for the flight he is checking? In particular, a level 2 check flight but not Level 2 'rested'?

Unless you can find something in the legislation that exempts it I would have thought that as the line check Captain you are part of the crew. Throw the question back to the person who told you otherwise and ask for confirmation in writing with reference to the legislation. I doubt whether you would get an answer or do the flight.

[tubby linton]

www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP371.PDF (http://www.pprune.org/www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP371.PDF)
1.3 LEVEL 2 - FDP Plus 60 minutes
Flight crew
a) The allowable FDP obtained from Table A may be extended by 60 minutes and a
sector need not be considered as a multi-sector flight until the sector is scheduled
for more than 7½ hours subject to the following conditions:
b) 2 local nights (minimum 34 hours) free from all duties must be achieved prior to an
extended flight duty period.
c) Flight crew members must be acclimatised.
d) Commander's normal discretion to extend an FDP is reduced to a maximum of 2
hours with no more than 1 hour being exercised prior to leaving the initial point of
departure.
e) Where a commander exercises discretion which uses any portion of the time
allowed after leaving the initial point of departure, then a report will be submitted
to the CAA.
f) One day off must be achieved following the extended FDP.
g) A maximum of 3 extended FDP flights may be undertaken in any consecutive 28
day period.
h) Maximum duty hours will be 180 hours in any 28 consecutive day period in which
the use of this extension takes place.
i) Minimum number of days off for flight crew operating one or more of these flights
will be 9 days in any period of 4 consecutive weeks in which the use of this
extension takes place.
j) Despatch crew must not be used.
k) Extension of FDP by split duty is not permitted.

My post was in reply to the original poster not the subsequent question.

[BOAC]

Tubby - I am familiar with Level2. The 'discussion' point revolves around Flight crew and whether a check Captain is actually part of the FLIGHT crew for the purposes of the CAP.

[sud747]

Well known practice, to "make it work", avoid being ear marked, and to avoid any personnel inconvinience that may result from it.
"If yo cannot beat them,..."
But never heard of any money being offered for it.

[no sig]

BOAC

IMHO, irrespective of the fact that your duty for a particular flight is to perform a check on another pilot, you are employed as a company pilot and are therefore subject to the FTL scheme of your airline when scheduled by them for any duty- which a check ride surely is. You would normally report with the crew, attend the briefing and de-briefing etc. that's a duty period in my book. Forget about that fact that you are a training/check pilot- your FTL scheme won't differentiate between line and training pilots duties.

Your hours for that duty must be recorded as a flying duty period of course to ensure that your next duty is legal. So, normal FTL scheme applys, even though you may not be designated as commander or first officer.

There is also another argument under CAP371 general principles, that says; for you to operate to a satisfactory level of efficiency as a check pilot you should be adequately rested under your scheme.

CAP371 2.1 The prime objective of a flight time limitations scheme is to ensure that crew members are adequately rested at the beginning of each flying duty period, and whilst flying be sufficiently free from fatigue so that they can operate to a satisfactory level of efficiency and safety in all normal and abnormal situations.

[Paul Rice]

Safety Concerns yes I quite agree with you on the issue of proof and of course that proof will be displayed in public in open tribunal very shortly. You would of course be very welcome to attend if so minded. But of course hoping to settle before we get to that point.

BOAC complete statements given to the CAA and also to BALPA. CAA were very thorough in their investigation but in the end did nothing. Similar deal with BALPA some intrest but little practical help.

Purpose of this thread was to see how widespread this practice might be in UK industry. Perhaps if it was widespread should I have took the bung and kept quiet. At least then would be in work.

[Sallyann1234]

Sorry if you want this to be taken seriously provide proof instead of posting without evidence here.
This from the poster "Safety Concerns" who started the thread
Passenger safety compromised at TAP
based entirely on unsubstantiated allegations.

.

[no sig]

Paul Rice

Since you have asked, I have to say in 38 years in the business I've never heard of such practice, and I've been with quite a few airlines in my time. I'm not a legal person, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that it is an action that could easily land the offender in court; particularly if sanctioned by, or with the knowledge of a postholder on the AOC. Corporate liability and all that.

[Dream Buster]

Just for the record - We all accept that aircrew work and fly to very strict rules and regulations but does anybody know of ANY previous successful legal action against an airline by aircrew?

You have my respect Paul Rice; just let us know when the public hearing will be....You may be the first and I would like a front seat.

DB :ok: :D

PS. Are you a Balpa member?

[excrewingbod]

BOAC,

While we are here, does anyone know for certain if a line check Captain is required to be 'in hours' for the flight he is checking? In particular, a level 2 check flight but not Level 2 'rested'? I have been told not and I'm pretty sure that is not correct. Cannot find any clues in JAR/EU Ops.

There isn't anything in JAR/EU Ops on this.

What does the company Part D state in regard to how line checks are conducted, in relation to the Line Training Captain's duties and responsibilities? Does it state if the LTC is deemed to be part of the operating crew when conducting a line check from the jumpseat?

I know someone who asked the CAA a similar question and the CAA response was as above - to check the Part D and failing that consult the Company Training or Flight Ops Postholder for their views on the subject.

[blue up]

Sliiiight thread drift, but...

If you have a (UK) level 2 variation to get home from Egypt and slide right up to the end of a 2 hour discretionary extention such that you will land at 1hr 59m into discretion, will you be illegal as you hit the TOGA switches?

If I elect to return home when knowingly going into duff weather and then something nasty happens such as a landing accident at my diversion then it could be argued that I knowingly passed the extension limit. Do you see where I am going with this?

The practical answer is straightforward but the legal aspect is not so clear.

[Right Way Up]

BOAC,
I know of one company that counts the line checker as part of the flightcrew, however in their eyes it makes the crew a 3 man crew with less restrictive hours.

[BOAC]

Blue up - you are legally covered there, assuming you judge the flight can be safely operated at the point where you push TOGA.. EU-OPS (Sub Part Q) says:

1.1.1. If on the final sector within a FDP unforeseen circumstances occur after take off that will result in the permitted increase being exceeded, the flight may continue to the planned destination or alternate

RWU - I think the 3 crew 'alleviation' applies only to FTLs on sectors over 7 hrs?

excrewingbod - ta - it does say that the TC is not part of the legally constituted crew which still leaves the whole thing still grey to my mind! Last para noted......

[no sig]

Sorry to continue this off topic subject

BOAC

I think you have to look to the basic principles of your scheme to get through this question. Even though you are not part of the legal consituted (i.e. designated operating) crew, you are a company pilot, in a company aircraft on duty at the behest of your airline- exercising the privlidges of your licence and ratings as a line check pilot. Unless your FTL scheme provides for an airborne duty (other than positioning) which is not a FDP, then I would consider a line check duty subject to all the provisions of any variations you have in your FTL's and that pre-flight rest and post flight requirements apply.

[captplaystation]

Does your presence on the flightdeck for the check require you to be properly rested ? you "could" argue not at a push.
Do you require to be rested for your next duty if you are then rostered as operating crew only (i.e. PIC not performing a check ) obviously Yes.
By that criteria your previous checking flight is pertinent to your rest for the subsequent duty, therefore it would be a kinda warped logic that concluded it didn't count.

[kick the tires]

that proof will be displayed in public in open tribunal very shortly.

Where and when?

Are you being represented by BALPA?

[Mr Angry from Purley]

BOAC
Silly question but why are you doing a L/C on a level 2, nothing quicker?.
I'd say you've a problem if you don't have the required rest, for one what if you decide to fail someone on the outbound sector. You can't jump in the operating seat for sure.
I'd say it's a no-no, if you want clarification the lovely kathryn.jones @caa.co.uk is the person with the answer :\

[PAXboy]

Non pilot speaking.
Looking at the problem of reporting that you were offered money to break the rules - based on working in commerce, local govt and financial institutions for 30 years ...

They offered me money to break the rules.
We did not do that and would never do that because it is against the rules.
Do you have written or recorded proof?
No. Usually they just ask the favour but this time they offered me money on the phone.
Do you have support from the CAA and BALPA to back you up?
No.
Since you do not have proof and the company have sworn at the highest level that they have never done this ...

I realise that you cannot say everything in here before the case comes up but it is evident that you have met a highly unusual situation, although you might have had some info on PMs to encourage you. But it will be your word against theirs.

I have seen many individuals challenge companies and sometimes in court. The companies win - unless you have got a real firecracker piece of evidence. When I challenged a company over unfair dismissal, I lost. I was comforted by the fact that everyone else in my department knew what had happened and that I was shabbily treated - but I still lost my job.
Good luck.

[BOAC]

Mr A - preaching to the converted:) Thanks for KJ's email.

Paul Rice - STILL cannot understand the "4 1/2 hrs" discretion for the c/crew you state - that is SO far over the limit there is no way you could have operated with that crew, and therefore the whole scenario becomes dubious. Under EU rules, the max extension is 3 hours except for 'emergencies'. Surely that was your 'stopper', and no company would dare to ask a Captain to exercise that much 'D'. Did you report THAT to the CAA as well?

[Carrier]

Quote: "I did raised the matter with CHIRP the CAA and BALPA and I get the feeling no ones that bothered."

Perhaps you need to name and shame the specific individuals at those organisations who are failing to perform their duties. If their dereliction of duty or incompetence is resulting in a threat to safety then they should certainly be exposed. An increasing number of posters on AVCANADA :::WELCOME::: (http://www.avcanada.ca) are doing this with regard to problem personnel at Transport Canada. It is not defamatory to post the truth! Ensure that you have the necessary documents or tapes to back up your statements. Also be prepared to let the mods have copies of them as they would want to know that this board is not being used for untruthful attacks - they should not object to the truth being posted on here. If the culprits do not like being named then their remedy is to perform their duties in a competent and reliable manner.

[JW411]

Mr Angry:

I often wondered where the lovely KJ ended up. It must be quite unusual for HMS Belgrano to recruit someone who really knows what they are doing!

She did a great and professional job when I worked with her 20 years ago.

[Flintstone]

bend the rules... nothing serious, more like changing your report time .....scrubbing the standby you were on and pretending you hadn't really done a morning standby.....saying that yesterdays standby never existed, it was really a day off.....minor stuff.


I'm curious to know at what stage you'd consider these transgressions to be serious because what you've posted there looks for all the world to me like rule breaking. Dressing it up by calling it rule bending doesn't really alter the fact.

[hawkerpilot]

Indeed Flintstone, I wondered the same thing when this lady bird expressed her interpretation of rules, but nobody mentioned it before.

The whole subject remembers me of a certain bizjet company in Portugal who at least in the past had the habit to ask you to change your showtime on a almost daily basis especially during the busy summers.

It was not asking really....If you said no, you would get a call from the fleetmanager asking you : "do you mean you refuse to fly tomorrow?"

Knowing that to be a reason to fire you stated in your contract most did what they were asked.

Not that that contract was worth much anyway, but Flintstone knows a lot more about that as well.....:)

[Flintstone]

No, no, no hawkerpilot. You misunderstand. That sort of behaviour and Ops going back over FTL records to alter sign-on times for days earlier in the tour so that we had more hours on the last day is just rule bending.

Geddit? ;)

Still keen to hear Airbus Girl's definition of rule breaking though.

[the bald eagle]

So who is this evil airline then?

[Flintstone]

Which one? The one forming the basis of this thread? Airbus Girl's? Or the one hawkerpilot and I experienced? If the latter feel free to PM me.

[thedeadseawasonlysick]

I can confirm a certain Portugese based airline asking on many occasions for a later sign on time or an earlier sign off time. Up to and including the fleet Manager.

[Flintstone]

Airline or fractional?

[thedeadseawasonlysick]

You'll have to guess. Shouldn't be too hard.

[Flintstone]

Oh I reckon I know. Just thought you'd like to share with the audience ;)

[thedeadseawasonlysick]

You ought. You used to work for them!

[Teddy Robinson]

As did the chief pilot of a feeder airline for a certain major carrier, who sent an email to all flight crew instructing them to report early or face the wrath of management .. I kept a copy ! :E

[the bald eagle]

Which one? The one forming the basis of this thread? Airbus Girl's? Or the one hawkerpilot and I experienced? If the latter feel free to PM me.

Sorry Flintstone i'm not as clever as you are, all i asked was who the airline is? I don't read between the lines of your private conversation with Hawkerpilot

[Icarus2008]

Whilst it may be hard to prove in court your dismissal was caused by this event, it maybe a useful idea you find sympathy with you group of co-workers to make your case.

The problem is very few workers today have any dignity left.:ok:

If there is harmony for truth, I can see you above the clouds very soon, Good luck!