Jetstar worker quit over conditions, safety concerns

[Sunfish]

Why am I not surprised about this?

Let me tell you how this ends:

- Aircraft off runway after rejected takeoff or overshoot on landing.

- Aircraft on fire.

- Cabin crew save themselves and leave passengers to do the every man for themselves thing with horrendous casualties because the exits get stuck real quick.

Jetstar is not alone in wanting young, cheap, compliant, cabin crew. In an emergency I would prefer to have a Qantas old boiler shouting instructions.


Jetstar Airlines is facing further allegations it is exploiting staff and compromising the safety of passengers.

A former flight attendant has told ABC's Lateline he quit his job at Jetstar because of safety concerns over long shifts for cabin crew and staff not being able to answer safety questions.

The budget airline maintains it has rigorous safety standards.

But a clause in the the contract for Singapore-based Jetstar crew states they could be forced to work shifts longer than 20 hours.

Former Jetstar flight attendant Dallas Finn joined the airline in June and quit two months later.

Two weeks before quitting, Mr Finn filed an incident report about fatigue after flying five return international flights in five days.

"The majority of these flights were quite busy, I found that my sleeping patterns were drastically effected to the point of fatigue," he wrote in the report.

"Clearly there are safety issues here pertaining to cabin crew if an emergency situation arises on the return flight from SGN OR MNL (Saigon and Manila), where the duty is 12/13hrs return."

Mr Finn told Lateline cabin crew were forced to work long hours.

"The majority of flights out of Darwin are back of clock, so you're leaving early evening and you're not getting back to the next morning," he said.

"The Ho Chi Minh flight is between a 12 and 13-hour day. They would actually change the pilots over in Ho Chi Minh but the cabin crew would have to fly back."

But Mr Finn says it was a flight he shared with Singapore-based staff that gave him more cause for concern.

"Before we actually get on a flight we have to go through a briefing and the questions are on an emergency procedure, an occupational health and safety procedure and a medical question," he said.

It was the first time I've actually been scared of flying because if something went down I didn't actually know if that crew would be able to back me up.
Dallas Finn

"I went to answer the emergency and the medical question when the cabin manager stopped me to get the Singapore crew to actually answer and, basically, they couldn't answer the emergency procedure and they couldn't answer the medical question.

"It was the first time I've actually been scared of flying because if something went down I didn't actually know if that crew would be able to back me up."

No-one from Jetstar was available to be interviewed on Lateline, but in a statement the airline said all crew are required to complete rigorous training.

"We're aware of a concern about the perceived proficiency of a crew member on a Melbourne to Darwin flight on 17 July 2011. These concerns were investigated and it was determined that the crew member satisfied proficiency requirements," the statement said.
Double standards

There are also concerns Jetstar's Singapore-based crew do not have the same protections as Australian crew.

Lateline has obtained a copy of the contract for Jetstar's Singapore-based flight attendants that states crew can be called on to work shifts up to 20 hours long.

But a clause in the contract also shows staff can be forced to work even longer than the 20-hour limit without consultation.

"The Planned Limit and Operational Extensions may be extended by agreement between Jetstar and the Supplier," the contract reads.

The supplier, Valuair, supplies cabin crew for Jetstar out of Singapore.

Valuair is unlikely to disagree with Jetstar on any crewing extensions as Qantas, though Jetstar Asia, has a 49 per cent share in the company.

A Singapore-based crew member told Lateline that Jetstar management points to the contract if staff complain about fatigue.

"If we complain about fatigue, or long hours or bad flight rosters, the management's reply is - 'you signed a legal contract, so you have to do whatever that is'," the crew member said.

While the contract states shifts can go beyond 20 hours, Jetstar said in a statement it does not roster 20-hour shifts.

"The longest rostered shift is 15 hours and 20 minutes. The average rostered international cabin crew shift is approximately 10-11 hours," the statement said.

In July, Lateline revealed Jetstar's Thai-based crew signed bonded contracts that required staff who quit or were sacked to pay back up to four-and-a-half months of their base wage.

The contract for Singapore crew similarly states they can be forced to pay back nearly three months of their base wage if they resign or are dismissed.

Mr Finn says Jetstar are exploiting foreign-based workers.

"I think they are abusing the situation with the working rights. They are going under Singaporean law and under Thai law but they are flying above our skies," he said.

Flight Attendants Association of Australia's Jo-Ann Davidson says the practices are "appalling".

"We would never allow under an enterprise agreement in Australia to have bonding for cabin crew, but they're allowed to do that overseas and we think that is unacceptable," she said.

Jetstar says overseas contracts reflects local market conditions.



Jetstar worker quit over conditions, safety concerns - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-29/jetstar-faces-staff-exploitation-allegations/3053370)

[ohallen]

And NO ONE can say that the Federal Parliament is not on notice with these issues and as the record shows, so far they have failed to act.

Why would any company be worried about behaving as Jetstar are when they show complete contempt for the parliament and then they are allowed to get away with it.

There is just no accountability in the system until someone gets dragged before a coroner and when and if that happens it should be a long list starting with Nick Xenophon....who did you tell what you found.

[Going Nowhere]

CNS based Cabin Crew routinely do CNS-DRW-SGN-DRW-CNS as a single duty, then have day rest back in CNS only to do it all again the next day.

Info is from a former JQ Cabin Crew member now at QLink.

[thrustpig]

VF / 3K / JQ a dirty ménage à trois of greed, lubricated with copious normalisation of deviance and manipulated with corporate psychopathy.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Presumably QantAsia will be exactly the same, with a bunch of badly trained, exhausted foreign serfs doing the actual work while the ad campaigns keep up with the 100% Aussie cutesy (white) Nippers and yuppie (white) passengers in stupid shirts.
How Australian. :yuk::yuk:

How long since a Qantas ad featured a staff member anywhere? The last one I remember was the pretty brunette chick in the early 2000s when the new uniform was launched. It used to be standard to use the staff to promote the airline and still is in many other airline ad campaigns, particularly from the Asian carriers.

[Boomerang_Butt]

"We would never allow under an enterprise agreement in Australia to have bonding for cabin crew, but they're allowed to do that overseas and we think that is unacceptable," she said.

Uhhh..... actually there are cabin crew working in Australia who are (or were) bonded. Perhaps it's not under an EBA which is why she can say that?

But apparently it's okay for pilots?

I have no problem with crew being made to pay back if they leave before probationary period for reasons other than death in the family or something equally as serious. So many of the 'kids' being employed these days are scared of hard work and run off after a month or two. Not helping the problems of any airline. Waste of money, especialyl when you add up how much it actually costs to do the training, it's nowhere in the league of flight crew but it's certainly not cheap either.

If they're concerned about duty hours going above 15 or even up to 20, there's plenty of other airlines flying into to Oz they should be looking at as well...

[Jabawocky]

I would prefer to have a Qantas

Sunny........I never thought I would see the day you made that kind of statement!

J:E


PS...I agree.

[Fuel-Off]

TBM, you bigot. Such flippant remarks have no place here, or this industry. Get back into your box and stay there. :mad:

Fuel-Off :ok:

[framer]

CNS based Cabin Crew routinely do CNS-DRW-SGN-DRW-CNS as a single duty, then have day rest back in CNS only to do it all again the next day.


I doubt thats possible. It's a twelve hour shift just to do a darwin sgn return without adding the two sectors between cns and darwin plus the turn arounds. It might be a single trip but I'l eat my hat if its a single duty.

[gobbledock]

Just like a wheel, the Jetstar cycle goes round and round and round.
These sort of reports leaking out are nothing new. I personally know of several employees from the departments of engineering, flying and operations who have pulled the pin over the past 4 years solely based upon safety concerns. Simple as that.
Whether there is measurable truth in their assertions is not for me to decide. Time will tell.

[The Kelpie]

Framer

The company only add the flight times together when making their statements they ignore turnaround, taxi, waiting, delays etc!!!

Just another way the company is economical with the truth!!

More to Follow

The kelpie

[AussieNick]

Framer, from my days working ground crew in Darwin and the time i'd do double shifts (day shift, 4 hours off then righ into the night shift) I can clearly recall watching the inbound crews from CNS doing an international leg, then been on an arriving AC later that night before doing the domestic that morning

[DrPepz]

SQ used to have cabin crew do SIN-PER turnaround.... and it only lasted a short while some years back. The total duty time was 13 hours from Changi to Changi, and the sick leave rates for that sector went through the roof.

Today SQ crew get a night stop for SIN-PER. And I think for cabin crew who do SIN-PER on the 1am flight which gets into PER at 6.25am, they don't even work on the flight back which returns the next morning at 7.45am and pax back to SIN.

Same goes for SIN-TPE, which is slightly shorter than SIN-PER. SQ crew get to nightstop while 3K crew don't.

3K and TR have crew do SIN-PER as turnarounds.

The law of the land does not quite matter because companies bent on treating their staff badly will go ahead and exploit whatever loopholes they can find.

[ShiteRider]

Well, safety means cost and its a cost that ****estar have never shown any interest in funding unless they've been compelled to limit the damage to their so-called corporate image. In my horrific experience working for this company - happy to say that I'm long gone now - time and time again significant events that should have been subject of OSCARs or more serious were either ignored or the people involed were, how do you say, 'leant' on aggressively by management to not make safety breaches and concerns not see the light of day. The current issue with CC is just another example of the mass exploitation that is customary with being held tightly by the block and tackle by this mob. Depends how badly you want to be in this game with them, but being grappled right where it hurts most by ignorant BCG graduates, project managers and bean counters who apparently make the hard-nose operational decisions has a finite future before the show runs off the rails big time. I feel for the saps that choose to live on and tolerate this mob hoping that things have to get better, but like one of their lamentable campaigns also suggested, "you have a choice".

[dizzylizzy]

Regarding the issue of fatigue and JQ SIN crew doing PER run exSIN, you'll find that a similar pattern does appear in the short and long haul Qantas cabin crew rosters; which is completed without issue.

As for 'I'd rather have an old boiler who knows that they're doing shouting commands', if you had observed these people at their bi annual recurrence day you'll be surprised at the low quality they display. Not all of them, but an alarmingly high number of them. And let's not start with those MEL instructors,

[1a sound asleep]

A very interesting development in the aftermath of Colgan flight 3407. A federal judge has ruled that Continental must hand over its training documents and related materials of the mainline operation to the Colgan families

WNED: Flight 3407 Families Gain Access to Airline Safety Policies (2011-09-28) (http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wned/news.newsmain/article/1/0/1857840/WNED-AM.970.NEWS/Flight.3407.Families.Gain.Access.to.Airline.Safety.Policies)

The basis for this is a negligence lawsuit being brought against Continental by the 3407 families. What the attorneys for the families are trying to establish is that Continental outsourced flying to a different outlet knowing that the Quality of training at Colgan was lower and thus outsourced the flying to Colgan to save money and thus are liable for the accident.

Something QF should wake up to. Jetstar means safety compromises

[oicur12.again]

"...the Quality of training at Colgan was lower and thus outsourced the flying to Colgan to save money and thus are liable for the accident."

There is no law requiring Colgan to have met the same level of training as CO. As long as minimum FAA standards are met.

[Sunfish]

Oicur:

"...the Quality of training at Colgan was lower and thus outsourced the flying to Colgan to save money and thus are liable for the accident."

There is no law requiring Colgan to have met the same level of training as CO. As long as minimum FAA standards are met.

Oh yes there is.

When a person chooses to buy something on the basis of its brand they are entitled to believe that the quality of the product is as is warranted.

If I buy a block of Cadbury chocolate with a beautiful wrapping and expensive advertising, I am entitled to receive Chocolate made by Cadbury, not a chunk of horse ****e mixed with Cocoa manufactured in Somalia.

To put that another way, if I sign up for an international flight with Qantas because it is "the safest airline in the world' I'd better not be shoved onto an Aeroflot flight.

[TSR2]

if I sign up for an international flight with Qantas because it is "the safest airline in the world' I'd better not be shoved onto an Aeroflot flight.

But is this not exactly what can happen when airlines code-share.

[Sunfish]

Read the Colgan transcript, fool.

The pilots were inexperienced, low paid, badly trained, serfs working under atrocious terms and conditions.

Why do you think the industry rolled over without the slightest whine or wimper when the FAA raised the minimum standards as a result?

Read the transcript, every word of it.

22:12:05.0
HOT-2
I've never seen icing conditions. I've never deiced. I've never seen any—
I've never experienced any of that. I don't want to have to experience that
and make those kinds of calls. you know I'dve freaked out. I'dve have like
seen this much ice and thought oh my gosh we were going to crash.


....22:13:58.4
HOT-1
oh yeah— I'm so glad. I would've— I w— I mean—. I would've been been
fine. I would have survived it. there wasn't— we n— never had to make
decisions that I wouldn't have been able to make but...now I'm more
comfortable.




22:16:34.8
HOT-1
Jesus Christ.
22:16:35.4
CAM
[sound similar to stick shaker lasting until end of recording]
22:16:37.1
HOT-2
I put the flaps up.
22:16:40.2
CAM
[sound of two clicks]
22:16:42.2
HOT-1
[sound of grunt] *ther bear.
22:16:45.8
HOT-2
should the gear up?
22:16:46.8
HOT-1
gear up oh #.
22:16:50.1
CAM
[increase in ambient noise]
22:16:51.9
HOT-1
we're down.
22:16:51.9
CAM
[sound of thump]
22:16:52.0
HOT-2
we're [sound of scream]



Document 2 Notice of Designation of Chairman of Board of Inquiry: 1B Filing Date March 24, 2009 1 page(s) of Text (PDF) Photos (http://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/document.cfm?fileid=418693&ntsbnum=dca09ma027)

[Worrals in the wilds]

There is no law requiring Colgan to have met the same level of training as CO. As long as minimum FAA standards are met. If there were an accident (as there was in this case), would there be grounds for a civil suit on the basis of negligence?

Honest question, as the only stuff I know about US law comes from watching Law and Order. :\

In Australia, my understanding is that if you run a company and someone gets hurt or killed, while your training and procedures may not have actually contravened any laws, if the resulting Coronial Inquest goes through you like a dose of salts and finds your procedures were wanting, you may face criminal charges. Again, happy to be proven wrong as I'm no expert, but I know both incidents below put the wind up dive operators.

There have been a couple of fatal scuba diving accidents recently where this has happened. One was in Queensland where the instructor was found to have no case to answer. She still had to face a committal and it was suggested that the company were deficient in their equipment maintenance. Given that the victim was foreign, it will be interesting to see if any civil action comes from it. Me, I'd be suing their butts off.
'No honeymoon killer' defence clears dive instructor Yuri Bonning of manslaughter charges | Courier Mail (http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/no-honeymoon-killer-defence-clears-dive-instructor-yuri-bonning-of-manslaughter-charges/story-e6freon6-1226051020175)

The second was in Victoria, where the dive company was fined for failing to ensure safety.
Parents win compensation after son's tragic dive | Herald Sun (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/parents-win-compensation-after-sons-tragic-dive/story-e6frf7kx-1225964774914)
My point is, both these companies probably argued 'hey we're not breaking any laws' but they both ended up in court after fatalities (they're also both now out of business). If there is an incident or accident, a company's training records and standards are put under the legal blowtorch. In regards to training, duty hours and other workplace conditions, good and safe practice is not just about staying within the law, but protecting yourself in the event of an accident, both from legal action and really bad publicity.

Reactive rather than proactive, but there you go.

[givemewings]

Lizzy is correct, QF had (not sure if still do as do not fly for them any more) a 3 day PER-SIN, SIN-PER-SIN, SIN-PER pattern (shuttle done with 4 seats in the cabin which rarely got used and at most 1 hour at a time to bolt down some food) which averaged 12.5hrs but regularly blew out to 14hr (ok under the EBA which was 16 with delay)

and the much hated PER-CGK-PER back of the clock (with no 'legal' crew rest, often taken by sneaky use of a free row of seats in shifts of two, while the pilots paxed back with a new lot picked up in CGK operating)

Eventually we got a taxi voucher for use on the way home to avoid driving tired after several crew had car accidents. Fat lot of good it was if you were single and had to drive to the airport in the first place. This then changed to a car pickup from home but you sometimes got a taxi back but sometimes ended up paying yourself.

So JQ weren't the only ones doing flying like this. Flew JQ recently (had no other 'choice', how ironic) and the crew told me their rostered duty was 12:45, they'd snagged some seats at the back to make use of but would probably end up doing closer to 14 as the flight came in late and we left an hour behind schedule, they were then going on another sector after dropping us off. (This was under the 'Team Jetstar' arrangement where they do not get o/t after 8hr 45 like QF crew do/did)

[Ngineer]

I remember a crew not being able to open a toilet door because of a container that had jammed it from the inside. A simple case of unclipping the door to remove the jammed article. Had it had been a passenger that had suffered a heart attack and blocked the door it would have had serious implications. I thought that all crew were trained about such design/safety features. I was told otherwise.

[Icarus2001]

crew not being able to open a toilet door because of a container that had jammed it from the inside. A simple case of unclipping the door to remove the jammed article. Really? Are you sure?
How does that work since all the toilet doors on aircraft that I can think of open outwards into the cabin or are bifold for that very reason.

http://thesunnysidesup.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/toasted_peanut_in_shell1.jpg
http://www.monkey-pictures.net/canthearyou.jpg

Sound familiar?

[Ngineer]

How does that work since all the toilet doors on aircraft that I can think of open outwards into the cabin or are bifold for that very reason.


Many "bifolds" open inwards at the centre of the door. There are obviously many types that you have not experienced, or maybe you just have no idea??:eek:

[Icarus2001]

Why does it always come down to personal put downs?

Okay, I'll bite.

Please list some aircraft types with toilet doors that open inwards.

Thanks for your guidance.

[C441]

Please list some aircraft types with toilet doors that open inwards.

Qantas 767 toilet bi-fold doors open inwards.

[SpannerTwister]

The bi-fold doors on the 734 aft toilets are often difficult (for some CC) to open when the waste-paper bin falls out of its cupboard and jams the door.

Hope this helps !

ST

[404 Titan]

Please list some aircraft types with toilet doors that open inwards.
Bi-folding doors on A330, A340.

[givemewings]

A330 & A380 bifolds also jam easily if the waste container falls out. Had to unclip one just yesterday after landing. Newbie crew looked at me and said "I didn't know you could do that". I think it's something you just learn while flying rather than something that is "officially" taught in training. Getting people out of the plane in an evac kinda overshadows opening the lavs.

It's even worse if the object is slightly left of centre because then the door jams a lot more than if it's just sitting in the middle- in the middle you can just give the door a good push and usually the object will move. Obviously in the case of a person it'd be a total removal. Ok so not all the crew might know how to do it but I doubt there'd be many cabin seniors flying who wouldn't know how to open them if needed. It's pretty obvious how to do it & if you didn't learn in the first month or two online I'd be pretty surprised.

[gobbledock]

Perhaps training staff in the use of 'paddlepop sticks' would help ??

[Capt. On Heat]

What's disappointing is no Capt having the professional gumption to say no, my crew are too fatigued and grounding flights. Perhaps that may spur the feds to act on the Jetstar lip service to safety.