Ryanair & Positioning Pilots

[Magplug]

I have several acquaintances working for RYR who seem to spend a great deal of their time 'positioning' around Europe on their days off to get to duties rostered from foreign bases.

They seem to be able to turn up at the gate for any company flight, without a boarding card, presumably having cleared security as staff rather than as a passenger and then are automaticly allocated a jumpseat if there is not a seat available in the cabin.

There seems to be some suggestion that they are being carried as a 'supernumerary crew member'. However they appear to be a crew member who has not attended any briefing or indeed even met his fellow crew prior to boarding. He is not present for 'observation duties' and plays absolutely no part in the operation of the aircraft. So being termed supernumerary crew is an extraordinarily tenuous description.

Surely a crew-member who passes through a staff checkpoint to then be miraculously transformed into a passenger is completely circumventing UK DFT security protocols?

When positioning on a 'day off' for a rostered duty is this day then discounted for FTL purposes as a day spent on 'duties at the behest of the company' ???

How does this setup work ?

[captplaystation]

It DOES work, so, instead of coming on here stirring up something that works pretty well for the hordes of pilots commuting, usually because they cannot get a home base &/or are unwilling to relocate to the base given . . . . . can't you just put a sock in it & leave well alone :oh:


I have reason to question your motives here, and doubt they could be in any way intended to be for the benefit of those involved (which I would hazard a guess you aren't, & if you are , did you never hear the Anglo Saxon saying "don't s**t in your own nest" :ugh: )

[Direct Bondi]

Magplug;

Let me educate and enlighten you on both your lack of regulatory knowledge and compassion for those less fortunate to be based near their home:

Regulation (EC) No 300/2008 establishes common basic standards in the field of civil aviation security that are directly applicable in all Member States of the European Union, including the UK. In addition, the Single Consolidated Direction (Aviation) 2010 (SCD) sets out more stringent measures that apply to aircraft in UK airspace and departing UK, and is issued to all airlines via the Security Manager.

Below is an extract from the SCD (Chapter 10, Part C), applicable to aircraft registered outside the UK, when in UK airspace or on the ground in the UK with its engines running:

‘A re-deploying staff member permitted to travel in the flight crew compartment as a passenger shall be permitted to remain in the flight crew compartment only if no seat is available in the passenger compartment.’

If a crew member is traveling to or from duty, they are re-deploying to or from a company assignment.

May I suggest you re-deploy yourself a more worthy assignment !

[3db]

Magplug,

If you are correct they have no boarding card, how do the staff on the ground after departure know how many souls are on board if the worst should happen? As a non-commercial pilot, it seems strange to me.

[Mach81]

I should imagine something as simple and legal as speaking to the flight dispatcher, he adds them on to the load sheet, so they are in the weight and balance,they are in the final figures....fully accounted for.... Fully legal......simples.

[Say Mach Number]

Because they are recorded as part of the crew compliment on the load sheet so do appear in THOB.

[ICEHOUSES]

As far as I know In the UK it's against dft rules or whatever to pass through security in your free time using your ID that is certain, if staff member is intending to travel on FR then surely they must hold a jump seat pass issued by the company in advance whether travel in flightdeck or in cabin and must travel through security airside through normal pax route, so if three or four FR pilots want to travel on jump seats back home and two get offloaded due no seats down back what happens to crew member then stuck airside with no purpose of work and no boarding card?

[16024]

@ICEHOUSES.
Well they might as well wait for the next flight to STN/DUB for the forthcoming interview.

A better question from the OP might be: why don't all airlines let us do this? It used to work a treat in the US

[despegue]

Oh for F..K sake!

What is your problem Sparkplug and others?!

The system is the only reasonable thing left in aviation, and now some morons are starting to critisize even those sparse rules making our profession still bearable!:ugh::mad::mad:

And you ARE allowed to pass by crew security when positioning to work by the way. I do it bloody every week AND with my water, my deodorant etc...

[Icanseeclearly]

Within the UK it is illegal to use staff search unless you are listed on the paperwork as operating or supernumerary crew, indeed at LHR if caught you will lose your airside pass.

As management at a previous airline we had discussions with dft about this very subject and it is an absolute no-no, we were told in no uncertain terms that positioning crew must be in possession of a valid boarding card and been through passenger security. Simple as.

Don't forget that any positioning crew on a boarding card (even in uniform) would be subject to airport taxes, maybe that's why Ryanair do it this way but I think they are playing with fire within the UK.

[Mach81]

It's been happening in the U.S. For years, your in uniform,fit for work,going to your place of work, you will be listed on the paperwork as crew member..... Indeed I'm sure in the unfortunate case of pilot incapacitation there may be something in the ops manual that would suggest "A positioning pilot, fit to fly may occupy his/her seat in order to continue safe operation of the flight..."

Also,I would say that an airline that has 300+ aircraft, 2000 flights a day etc is not really in the habit of doing something illegal in the eyes of the DFT Numerous times EVERY DAY, for the last 20 odd years! If the authorities/security had a problem with this then it would have been addressed by now don't you think.......

[anson harris]

I think the question is that if they are recorded as being part of the crew - why doesn't the flight count for FTL purposes? You can't have it both ways.

[3db]

About 15 years ago I worked airside at LHR. It was clearly explained I could not use my airside pass unless performing my normal duties (work for HMG), it was not to be used in my free time. Same for staff parking - no free staff car park while on 2 weeks holiday. If FR have people without boarding cards and not functioning as crew, going airside, (understood they should be on the load sheet if they get a seat anywhere onboard) it would seem to me to be in breach of the regs.
Can anyone explain why/how its legal?
I am not FR bashing, just concerned/interested.

[16024]

Within the UK it is illegal to use staff search unless you are listed on the paperwork as operating or supernumerary crew, indeed at LHR if caught you will lose your airside pass.

Well that's rubbish, unless you're telling me that none of the dispatchers, caterers, base managers etc are using staff search.

If the excuse by the cheap suits at DfT were to do with security, I might have limited sympathy. But tax? FFS! Collect it properly! Some of these people need to be kicked, literally kicked out of their endless flipping meetings and dragged, by the ear, over to where the professionals are trying to get the flipping job done.

[Star1101]

The US Cargo carriers set up a good way of getting around on their network around Germany, France ,UK etc.
It should be a piece of cake for the Low cost carriers to do something like it.

[Magplug]

Don't forget that any positioning crew on a boarding card (even in uniform) would be subject to airport taxes

Actually that is rubbish. See HMRC Air Passenger Duty Exemptions (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/excise-notice-550-air-passenger-duty/excise-notice-550-air-passenger-duty#exemptions-from-apd)

3.1.1 Persons carrying out certain duties

Some categories of people are not regarded as passengers for APD purposes when they are engaged in duties on a flight. As such, APD is not charged on their carriage. These are:

- flight crew
- cabin attendants
- persons not carried for reward who are
escorting a passenger or goods
undertaking repair, maintenance, safety or security work
ensuring the hygienic preparation and handling of food and drink

These people are also exempt if they carry out the above duties within 72 hours of the flight ending. The same exemption applies to people who begin a return journey within 72 hours after performing any of the above duties provided that they are returning to base, that is the place where they are normally stationed or from where they normally operate.

However, when these people are travelling as passengers, and are not engaged in these duties or returning to base having been engaged in such duties on a previous flight, they are passengers and are chargeable for APD purposes.

@1604
You seem to be confusing other airport staff with those staff members actually travelling on flights as a passenger. Agree with your rant about the DFT suits though.


I think the question is that if they are recorded as being part of the crew - why doesn't the flight count for FTL purposes? You can't have it both ways.


I believe RYR actually are enjoying it both ways.... It is just that the Airport security heads, CAA, DFT and Border Force have yet to catch up what they are doing.

[Deeply Concerned]

There's a clear abuse here. If your roster shows you as being on a day off, I can't under any circumstances see that it's legitimate to walk through the staff security channel in uniform, walk onto the flightdeck and travel as though you were positioning staff on duty. Remember also that a contractor isn't an employee either.

Also clear problems with duty hours, days off etc. RYR are enjoying it more ways than one and it's the crew that suffers and are ultimately responsible for breaking dft rules. Sooner this is exposed the better for everyone.

[2Planks]

If you are that deeply concerned are you going to stop all the long haul guys that operate out of London (for instance) spending many hours to drive to London down any number of motorways before they report for duty (or pop into a Travelodge for a nights kip). I know where I'd rather sit as I commuted and its not down the M1 and round the M25......

[Star1101]

Reciprocal agreements with other carriers would be a relief.

[4468]

If it's totally legit, then fair enough. Though I don't see how it can be, in more ways than one.

I always take more of an interest when folks try to immediately shut down discussions with phrases like "put a sock in it" or "redeploy yourself!"

Doesn't make them sound confident of the legalities, does it?

If it ain't legal, it's an abuse, and shouldn't be happening.

[Juan Tugoh]

If you are that deeply concerned are you going to stop all the long haul guys that operate out of London (for instance) spending many hours to drive to London down any number of motorways before they report for duty (or pop into a Travelodge for a nights kip). I know where I'd rather sit as I commuted and its not down the M1 and round the M25......

It's either legal or it isn't. If it's legal then there is nothing to worry about and those calling for people to put a sock in it are just making it look suspicious. If it isn't legal then pointing out that some others may also be doing something else that contravenes the rules will not make it any more legal. Two wrongs do not make a right. The more people shout against this the more guilty they look. Let the light of day in, let the regulators look at it - if it's all above board there is nothing to fear.

[Nil further]

There is a reciprocal thread on a similar theme in Frbrant Harbour.Maybe the authorities are starting to tighten up ?

Perhaps if FR were to be stopped from doing this it would put an end to some of their more obscene employment practices as well ?

[InSoMnIaC]

it's totally legal as long as the crew is on the GD. our outfit requires us to make a request to the company a week before we want to travel as non ops crew. no problems. no need for boarding pass.

Regarding FTL however, we are considered as starting duty at the sign on time of the crew operating that flight. If this is not happening at FR then it leaves the Positioning crew exposed in case of an incident.

[captplaystation]

You do not sign on "on duty" when you leave home for a 2 hr slog down the motorway, so, unless the company have rostered you, you are neither on duty when you climb on board a flight (of "your" choice ) to make the journey from where you live, to where you commence your work.

Thinking Colgan accident here, it would be remit of any of us to present ourselves for work fatigued due excessive commuting, but, it is the individuals responsibility, and cannot be counted as duty, you could have come the night before, then what ? we are going to start arguing about min rest etc ? get real.

Facilitating your travel free & ticketless, is one of the few outwardly generous things Ryanair do, and they are not by nature generous, so why ? the simple answer is that it has given them flexibility, and helped them in persuading bods to base themselves everywhere under the sun, because it was always "commutable" for free. It also provides a handy unofficial standby crew member if one FD crew goes "tech", in which case of course the Supernumary crew member would then be on duty & it would impinge on his projected further duty, but you wouldn't hear the company complaining.

For those of you not too long in aviation, you have perhaps not identified the fact that many administration/ ground based types have an unconditional loathing/jealousy (God knows why ? ) of aircrew. If the current system, which has been widely used for decades, hasn't rung any alarm bells, why are some of you coming on here ringing them loudly to gain attention ? some strange ulterior motive there ? do you actually want to restrict one of the few freedoms we benefit from ? can't figure you guys out :rolleyes:

[zerotohero]

I used to see guys jumpseating in on a late flight to do earlys the next day after only a few house sleep then once the 5 day pattern was over they would jump seat home on a late flight after an early duty. These guys looked constantly fatigued.

I believe it does say somewhere in Part A that your not supposed to do this but I would guess that's only to prevent canceled flights disrupting the schedule in case you don't make your duty

A good friend of mine was once told by his base captain that he will be removed from his duty because he flew in on a late from STN to do an early the next day but ended up doing the duty still because the base captain was told it's none of your business how he gets to work. He could have driven all through the night and you would not have known.

Legal or not I can't say. Personal opinion is that it most definitely should not be allowed. You have to be in full uniform and available to assist with monitoring refuelling or walk around a etc so I suppose that makes you active crew. However it does not count as FDP! So there not paying the game right that way I suspect.

My guess is that if it was removed as a privalage and had to be rostered it would cost Ryanair so much time and hassle that the 5/4 roster would have to be scrapped and that would lose them a huge amount of crew that only work in FR because of the jumpseating 5/4 option. Likely planes would be parked up due lack of crew and expansion slow or even retract. You can't have that many airframes without the crew.

A lot of smaller Italian bases struggle for crew as no one really wants to be there. 5/4 you can jump in and out and earn a crust. Lose the option and i would guess most will jump out and apply elsewhere

[Magplug]

Let's not confuse two issues here.....

I am a commuter - It is a lifestyle choice usually for reasons of family location. From my experience commuting more than one time zone is barely do-able and as EASA has added responsibilities on the shoulders of the operators, those who are long-haul commuting are now very much under the spotlight.

There is a huge difference between choosing to commute from home to a foreign base where you carry out blocks of work..... and being rostered between bases all over Europe to which you have to take yourself on your rostered days off.

On my days off I do not carry out any work at the behest of my employer so they are truly days free of duty for FTL purposes.

Can the same be said of RYR pilots ?

[3db]

For UK based people, I would guess free travel to/from place of employment would be considered a perk by HMRC tax inspectors (other people pay travel costs to place of employment from tax paid salary, contractors might be different) - hence it should be declard and taxed by HMRC. Just a thought, not saying all FR people don't declare it!

[Star1101]

Normally if you're going out of base you get scheduled for the repositioning and get paid per diem ,
If you go out of base to do a simulator check they should schedule you for the repositioning and pay a per diem there too for those days.

[Meikleour]

Flight time limitation schemes were introduced to limit excessive fatigue inherent in operating aeroplanes and time spent therein.
Thus, if an employer wishes to "passenger" an employee somewhere at it's behest then that time carries over towards duty time totals.
So, if one decides to "self position" ie. at your own convenience rather than the convenience of the employer - is this time now not contributing to any personal fatigue?
I freely admit that I know nothing of the practices within FR but any half good lawyer would have a field day with some of the ideas expressed on this thread.
It really is not that difficult! That is why many companies publish travel time criteria to their employees' main base. This allows them to show their "duty of care" to their employees. In other words - ignore at your peril!

This no longer affects me but I have seen too many colleagues worn down by excessive "commuting" not to mention been subjected to excessive "company behest" positioning by indifferent crew controllers myself.

[I-AINC]

Totally agree with Captplaystation and despegue!

Why the **** you complain for the only thing left SIMPLE in aviation?
**** off, we are PILOTS! Maybe the ONLY people who must be allowed to stay on the apron and in the aeroplanes at all time without questioning!

Too much burocreacy in this job. Seems that some of you LOVE a complicated life!

[PENKO]

At least a commuter can sleep uninterrupted each night while he is away from home. How many non-commuting fathers and mothers can say that?


If commuting is done in your own time and out of your own free will, FTL's should be totally irrelevant. What's next, FTL's telling me I can't bring my children to school in the morning? FTL's telling me I can't go to a party at night? FTL's telling me that I cannot do my morning exercise run before a flight?

After years of commuting I can honestly say it was of no consequence to my performance at work. I can't say that of my family life..

[PENKO]

So, if one decides to "self position" ie. at your own convenience rather than the convenience of the employer - is this time now not contributing to any personal fatigue?

Many many things contribute to personal fatigue. It's called having a life. You may choose to drive around the M25 every working day, I may choose to commute to base at my leisure and live in a hotel 5 minutes from the crew room. You may choose to raise pigs and may be found shoveling pig manure whilst I leisurely board one of my commuting flights listening to Bach on my noise cancelling headphones. You may choose to make a baby with your wife which will guarantee that you will not sleep properly for the coming years, whilst I may choose to leave all the family hassle at home for my five day stint at base.

As long as our performance in the flight deck does not suffer, who are we then to mind each others private lives?

[macdo]

Interesting thread. I got briefly arrested and had my pass suspended at a big UK airport for using the staff channel when positioning on company business as pax in casual clothes. Caused a load of hassle and our crews are specifically told that this is illegal to do in the UK now.

[RAT 5]

There is still the very grey area about the true status of the so-called contractor. It will be resolved; there is too much coming into the open about such abuse.
There will be those who believe they should have employee status, but can't be bothered to campaign for it. There are those who prefer to keep hush hush about it and milk it for what they can. (however, the more modern structure makes that less appealing). So most are caught in the 'self-employed' grey area.
Simple question; pilot on a company employee contract has to position from home base to another in the network before & after duty. Is that travel time rostered as duty or time off? If it is considered duty time, and/or even FTL time, then who organises the roster & travel time? I'm sure you will find that for direct employees it is yes to duty time and at company cost and organisation. This is basic FTL application and employees' T's & C's. The FTL issue is safety related; the combined duty time also has a limit.
So, if employees enjoy these considerations why not contractors? Are they some how immune from FTL & duty time considerations? I understand contractors will not benefit from paid costs; that's their bed to lie in, but for duty/rest issues they should not be any different from any pilot uncharge of a company a/c.
A contractor has a common/preferred base. They even have a registered office which, for self-employed, could be considered their base. Sometimes they need to operate a considerable time & distance from either. How can all that be some ghostly apparition?
And the employ will also enjoy being paid for their positioning time, as it is duty. The contractor really is on a triple whammy.
If you disagree then justify it.

[Meikleour]

PENKO: Yes, most poeple do have lives outside of work. However you seem to be argueing that a) driving from your real home (I am assuming here that you do not live at an airport) b)parking your car c) battling your way through airport queues for security d) waiting for boarding of your flight (hoping that it doesn't go "tech"/get cancelled e) board and endure your flight - that none of the foregoing have any influence on how tired you may get versus your locally based colleague who has the same family life but no commute to do?!
If your arguement were true then no FTL scheme would require the counting of positioning flights.

[PENKO]

Meiklour, even dining on behest of the company is counted as duty time. Now I am sure you don't advocate skipping diner before an early flight!
The reason positioning flights count as duty is not because they are so specially tiring but because you are WORKING when you position.

A commuter is not working when he commutes. A commuter arranges his life voluntarily so that he chooses to fly to his work in his OWN SPARE TIME. So to come back to your question, a typical short haul commuter spends far less time traveling than most 'local' pilots who drive 30 to 45 minutes or up to an hour twice each day. And no, passing through security and boarding an aircraft is no big deal for a seasoned commuter. You just fast track through everything, you don't even think about it.

A quick calculation of a pilot who lives say, in AMS and works in LGW.
20 minute train ride to AMS, 90 minutes to reach the hotel in LGW, and then 5x ten minutes walk each day to reach the crew room, followed by another 110 minutes to come back home. That is a rough total of 270 minutes 'traveling', most of which is done reading a good book.

Compare that to a colleague who lives locally. 45 minutes to the car park by car, 20 minutes to reach the crew room by bus. Then again 65 minutes to go home after the duty. That is 130 minutes travel for just one day of work. Times five is 650 minutes every week traveling, most of which is behind the wheel of a car in busy traffic.


So are you sure that commuting is by definition more fatiguing?
I did not even mention that the commuting pilot gets 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep every day for five days compared to his local colleague who also has to run a family on those five working days.

[ManaAdaSystem]

If your arguement were true then no FTL scheme would require the counting of positioning flights.

Spot on!

We ("foreign" airline) have been told we can't use the crew channel if we deadhead through UK.

[Meikleour]

PENKO: You are "muddying the waters" of this arguement by extending your case into the block of work the commuter does when he is away from home! That was not the original point of this thread! It was about people subjecting themselves, voluntarily to extra travelling fatigue by commuting before a duty.

At one stage I commuted from the south of the UK to Frankfurt for two years on an, albeit, long haul roster. No matter which LON airport was used (I preferred LCY by the way!) public transport to airport (allow 2 hours), one hour at least check-in time, flight itself ( 1:45 usually) + ensuing public transport to HOTAC. Very rarely was this less than a 5 hour journey. Tiring - you bet, especially when you have to travel to fit in with available flight/train timetables which I put to you probably does not affect your based colleague.

[Magplug]

I have been both a local employee and a commuter, and I have to say that aside from the odd M25 disaster or airport closure through snow then one is no more stressful or time-consuming than the other.

@Captplaystation / despegue / I-AINC

You seem content to break the law. I am sure your employers regard you as an absolute gift. The airline distances itself from the employment reality it has created in the sure and certain knowledge that if an employee is caught abusing security all they have to do is to fire them and the problem (and any PR fallout) disappears at a stroke.

Whilst selfishly feathering your own little nests the professional status and reward so long fought-for by our predecessors becomes ever degraded. With every new pilot joining the industry that is prepared to cut corners and do something else for nothing the downward spiral continues.

[PENKO]

Meiklour, if you associate commuting with fatigue then you must look at the whole working block. That's not muddying the waters as you say. You cannot single out commuting as 'fatiguing' by just looking at one negative aspect and disregarding all the other factors. Muddying the waters is arguing that FTL's come into play for something we do in our spare time!
Where do we stop otherwise?

Can I go for a run in the morning before a flight? Can I drive my children to school? Can I visit my parents who live two hours away from the airport before reporting for an afternoon flight? Can I manage my own company before leaving to the airport to work?




And yes, you had a horrible commute to Frankfurt, but that is absolutely not the norm. Leave it up to the individual to decide wether their commute is fatiguing. Personally I find running a family and working 'from home' far, far more fatiguing than commuting. Commuting was the saving grace when we had a newborn in the house.

[Juan Tugoh]

I have no particular care how this pans out but can anyone tell me how commuting on your own dime is less, or more fatiguing than positioning at the behest of the operator? One attracts FDP, the other does not, yet they are identical activities.

[Star1101]

Scheduled deadheading eventually leads to a bidding system based on your seniority number that creates incentive and a more efficient work environment.

[Meikleour]

PENKO: As you can probably tell, I am not against commuting per se. My issue is with crew who appear to take the view that what they do in their own time ( that is their real life) can have no bearing on their work fatigue. Surely you can concede that a commute always involves fitting in with schedules and invariably takes longer than one would hope. This is before one even considers cancelled flights etc. The guy who is based correctly contols his own travel schedule. The real issue is do all commuters always give themselves 12 hours rest in a hotel before reporting as would have been required with a company placed positioning flight?

To illustrate this with a rather extreme example - a friend of mine was required to act as "pilots council" for a disciplinary hearing for an F/O for a well known Hong Kong airline. The defendant had been caught commuting in from europe arriving in the afternoon prior to operating back to europe! His arguement was, "it was his own time and anyway the rest he got on the flight was just as good as any hotel"!! You can probably work out for yourself how that went with the company and the CAD! The clue is - it involved a P45

[Rananim]

Its simple.Providing you have the right ID and clear security,pilots must not be denied access at their place of work.Imagine an airport without pilots.Imagine a city guy being denied access at the office.Or a doctor locked out of his surgery?911 has tightened it up and thats good but positioning is what we,as pilots,do.Stress in the pre-flight phase is a known cause of accidents in aviation.
Truth is...many security guys enjoy giving pilots a hard time.Check the ID,the gendec,pass the security.No more questions.Its that simple.

[macdo]

JUAN TUGOH
quite simple, commuting in my own time cuts down on my rest at home. I have been doing this on a LH programme for the last 2 years. If I get 2 days off, day 2 is spent commuting back to base ready to work the next morning, so in effect I get only 1 day off. It is not a lifestyle to be recommended.

[Star1101]

Some of those remote bases are not easy to get to on your own time,
Full flights and other crews trying to get a seat before you and with that no reciprocal agreements on other carriers.

[PENKO]

PENKO: As you can probably tell, I am not against commuting per se. My issue is with crew who appear to take the view that what they do in their own time ( that is their real life) can have no bearing on their work fatigue. Surely you can concede that a commute always involves fitting in with schedules and invariably takes longer than one would hope. This is before one even considers cancelled flights etc. The guy who is based correctly contols his own travel schedule. The real issue is do all commuters always give themselves 12 hours rest in a hotel before reporting as would have been required with a company placed positioning flight?

Meiklour.
I do concede that commuting has its own risks regarding fatigue and cancelled flights. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with fair and honest rules set by the company regarding pilots who use commuter travel perks.

We must however not fall into the trap of equating commuting with positioning duties. Commuting is no duty and as such, FTL rules such as '12 hours rest' rest should not apply! It would be quite nonsensical to ask a pilot who commutes from AMS to LGW to observe a 12 hour rest period after his commute just because he took a 38 minute flight the day before on his DAY OFF, as a passenger. Whilst he is taking this 12 hour rest, his locally based FO could still be partying and drinking alcohol, or be running a marathon, or be driving for three hours to visit his in-laws, so why burden the commuter with FTL's? Just because of that 38 minute flight? Is that reasonable? I don't think so.

[172_driver]

This pattern here follows that of their employment practices and money bags - a big fat gray area.

I can speak for myself having commuted for years, sometimes with less time at base than a 'minimum rest period'. Was I tired? At times yes, but no more than my colleague who had two sick kids at home. My overall well being? The flexible commuting made it possible to keep up somewhat of a family life with a newborn at home. In the mean time I never got the opportunity to transfer, even though vacancies existed at the base of choice.

While the commuting helps a lot of people that were in my situation, I think the system should be highlighted and exposed. Tighten the screws on them, issue proper tickets, pay the airport fees and let OFF day mean OFF day. It's part of levelling the playing field with competitors. They will have to take the basing issue seriously and bring back some general decency.

[PENKO]

I have no particular care how this pans out but can anyone tell me how commuting on your own dime is less, or more fatiguing than positioning at the behest of the operator? One attracts FDP, the other does not, yet they are identical activities.

Juan,

I have an airport standby duty tomorrow. It consists of sitting in a lounge on a couch watching TV, moaning about work and politics, telling silly stories whilst waiting to go back home... AND it attracts flight duty time. So can we please stop using that red herring of 'how can commuting not count towards the FTL's? Unless you count your visits to the inlaws as FDP. Commuting is voluntary, done in your own time, at your own leisure. As such it should not be counted as duty.


And do remember guys, commuting is just a base closure away. In modern aviation with bases spread out all over Europe and bases opening and closing, commuting will become more and more important. You just cannot uproot your family just because the your base happens to be on the scrap list this year.

[Juan Tugoh]

Penko, I wasn't using any red herrings. All I was asking was what is the difference on the body when you sit in an aeroplane at the behest of an operator, or whether you do it on your own dime? The logical conclusion of either argument is not pleasant, you either say there is no difference and therefore should count any pre op commuting by air as fdp, or you jump the other way and that would allow an airline to position you without it counting as fdp. What you are defending is the logically indefensible argument that sitting in an aircraft only sometimes (when it suits you personally) is in any way fatiguing. As I said I really do not care as it doesn't affect me, so I will not ever be in the situation where I have to make such arguments in front of a judge who is deciding whether the accident/incident that I was involved in (God forbid) was in any way down to a personally advantageous interpretation of the FDP rules. Barristers are paid to make us and our decisions look foolish, I don't want to in the position of trying to defend the indefensible. I hope you never have to either.

[Pinkman]

Short haul airline commuting is generally safety positive - i'll tell you why..

Given that commuting is generally done the afternoon or evening before work the next day, there will be a good uninterrupted sleep in their pad or hotel close by their base - so a sensible wake up time, followed by a very quick stroll or drive to work.


Emphasis on short-haul commute not short-haul flight operated. People abuse the system - look at Colgan: The FO was living near Seattle and commuting to Newark.. to get there she flew from Seattle to Memphis in a spare seat on Fedex and then to Newark on another Fedex flight, planning to sleep in a Colgan crew lounge. Crikey! My understanding is that this lead to FAA Hours Of Service (HOS) changes.

[Pizza Express]

Could someone explain the mechanics of the "tax paid" sector cheque? LOL

[172_driver]

midnight cruiser,

The objective is to level the playing field. We're in a race to the bottom and the lowest level sets the target for competitors as well. If you are commuting at the behest of the company (as in: sent out of base, in Ryan lingo), they should be paying the price for that. That's not happening.

When positioning by own choice, I just think someone (company or commuting pilot) should be paying the cost involved just like every other passenger is paying a security surcharge (or whatever it's called these days). We'll see if the generousity of positioning pilots 'for free' still stands. It will expose their true colors. And honestly, I think they will find it pretty hard to crew some of the most far flung bases. A monetary reward my be appropriate, or an honest basing system where direct entry pilots just can't skip ahead of the masses having patiently waited for a base for years.

[PENKO]

Penko, I wasn't using any red herrings. All I was asking was what is the difference on the body when you sit in an aeroplane at the behest of an operator, or whether you do it on your own dime? The logical conclusion of either argument is not pleasant, you either say there is no difference and therefore should count any pre op commuting by air as fdp, or you jump the other way and that would allow an airline to position you without it counting as fdp. What you are defending is the logically indefensible argument that sitting in an aircraft only sometimes (when it suits you personally) is in any way fatiguing. As I said I really do not care as it doesn't affect me, so I will not ever be in the situation where I have to make such arguments in front of a judge who is deciding whether the accident/incident that I was involved in (God forbid) was in any way down to a personally advantageous interpretation of the FDP rules. Barristers are paid to make us and our decisions look foolish, I don't want to in the position of trying to defend the indefensible. I hope you never have to either.

Juan,
Dressing and driving children to school causes fatigue.
Doing groceries causes fatigue.
Mowing the lawn causes fatigue.
Driving every day for an hour just to reach your airport causes fatigue.
Running 10K to stay fit causes fatigue.
Going on and returning from holiday causes major fatigue.
And yes, commuting causes fatigue.
All these things are called 'having a life'. They are not governed by FTL's. FTL's govern what my employer asks of me (i.e. a duty) and what I can give in return. Not what I choose to do in my spare time.

Hence FTL's govern that I earn twelve hours rest after sleeping through my early morning standby, but not when I can or cannot mow the lawn, run a marathon or commute for that matter (show me the article that says so). FTL's know that I have a life, so all it asks of me is to be 'well rested' and to make arrangements to live closer to work if my commute regularly takes more than an x amount of minutes. Well, that is exactly what commuters do IMHO.

[Twiglet1]

Magplug
EASA FTL also has enhanced crew members responsibilities. In the case of a crew member travelling on a late flight on a day off ( in uniform or not) into an early duty there will be trouble at mill if anything went wrong. It can't be no coincidence that there are only two UK AOC who have approved FRMS and both have commuting protocols. You cannot however police professional crew members there has to be a level of trust involved.
Penko - plenty of science out there to suggest running marathon before flying not a good idea wasn't there a recent incident involving a pilot who did such ?

[RAT 5]

A quick poll. No particular company involved. it is just what you are allowing to become the norm by turning many blind eyes.

Hands up anybody who likes to work = be on duty for no pay.
Hands up anyone who likes to sit in an hotel, away from home, at their own cost, on SBY duty for no pay.
Hands up anyone who lives in A, is based in A but then has to position to/from B to work; during time off, at their own cost, for which no duty time credit is given.
Hands up anyone who likes to divert, position home, go out of hours for next day and receive no compensation.
Hands up anyone who likes go sick/injured for 4 weeks for no pay.
Hands up anyone who likes to take holiday, for no pay, not at your own choice.

Hands up anyone who .....etc......etc. get real guys.

The XAA's know all about this and they turn a blind eye. Why should you do also? It is your profession. Protect it because no-one else will.

[tubby linton]

Easa FTL has this to say about commuting:

Crew members should consider making arrangements for temporary accommodation closer to their home base if the travelling time from their residence to their home base usually exceeds 90 minutes.

[captplaystation]

Indeed, but, I think what they are saying is please don't drive every day from Birmingham to Stansted & back , NOT , please don't sit as pax in an aircraft from Stansted to Pisa on your last OFF day. Fly 5 Days in Pisa, then take another aircraft home. . . . .

[tubby linton]

Our ops manual simply states what I have reproduced in my post above
I think this has been included purely to address the Colgan situation and is one of the better changes in easa ftl

[PENKO]

Crew members should consider making arrangements for temporary accommodation closer to their home base if the travelling time from their residence to their home base usually exceeds 90 minutes.
This is exactly what commuters do.

[Wageslave]

Position in uniform listed as supernumerary = on duty and log duty time.

Position " " " on day off paying no APT is tax fraud and blatant contravention of duty regulations. It cannot be "positioning".

Run a shipping line and need to avoid inconvenient regs and oversight, register in Panama or the Phillipines.

Where do you register to do that in aviation?

[caber]

This entire topic makes me very happy to be a pilot in the U.S.A.

This should not be this complicated.

[Checklist Charlie]

Interesting read this is.

I find it somewhat of a conflict where people "commuting" in their own time are essentially making a donation of that time to their employer. It seems from many comments that this is acceptable to the point that some get quite huffy defending this donation.

Of course this charitable gift to the airlines is reciprocated by them in return to the flight staff, isn't it!

As a matter of interest, when you are donating this time by commuting on 'days off', are you covered by worker compensation insurance or your 'loss of licence' insurance should you suffer a work related injury or even death as the direct result of this 'commuting'

CC

[ExXB]

The Montreal Convention 1999 (which replaced the Warsaw Convention) would not apply to persons travelling on this basis. Passengers require a ticket, even a 'free' ticket.

[PENKO]

Checklist Charlie, if an employee chooses out of his own free will to commute, then why would the employer be liable for his insurance? I never felt that I donated my free time to the company. It was always my decision not to live near base and always took full ownership of my commuting. I do think the employer should do their best to facilitate commuting if their own policies (base closing/opening/commands) tend to displace people.

As for private insurances, as far as I know 'commuting' is not one of the exclusion grounds for your loss of license cover, but if you have any indication that this is indeed the case, please let us know. I'll double check the small print. Anyway, commuters tend to be on the road less than their 'locally' based colleagues, I see no higher risk for the LOL-insurer. Travel insurance can be a bit more tricky though, but some insurers are happy to insure your commuting for a small surcharge. Same goes for your car insurance if you keep your car based at a foreign airport. It took a bit of shopping around but I found an insurer that was happy to cover my car all over Europe for no surcharge. And when the inevitable damage occurred they paid out with no questions asked.

Health insurance should be no problem at all for most commuters, they will be well acquainted with the E106 form (or whatever it is called these days).



.

[Huck]

This entire topic makes me very happy to be a pilot in the U.S.A.

This should not be this complicated.

Stuff like this is why we left.....

[Jwscud]

Position in uniform listed as supernumerary = on duty and log duty time.

Position " " " on day off paying no APT is tax fraud and blatant contravention of duty regulations. It cannot be "positioning".

Run a shipping line and need to avoid inconvenient regs and oversight, register in Panama or the Phillipines.

Where do you register to do that in aviation?

Ireland.

See also NLH

[1201alarm]

All I was asking was what is the difference on the body when you sit in an aeroplane at the behest of an operator, or whether you do it on your own dime? When you do it on your own dime, you can choose not to do it, when it is too fatiguing. While positioning is your obligation out of your work contract.

I am with PENKO on this, we have to distinguish what we have to do on behalf of the operator, and what we do in our free time. One is called positioning and rightly so included in the flight time limitations, and any other activity is private life, this can be sports, commuting, child raising, etc...

For private life there is the requirement to take aedequate measures to show up rested for duty. PENKO showed it in an easy understandable way that this is not as black and white as the paragraf nitpicking fraternity would like to see it, and we can never run the system without trust in pilots judgement.

Well now the crucial question is: are there operators out there, where pilots are homebased in A, have a week of flights in B, and proceed to B in their free time without adding this travel time into flight duty limits? That would seem against the rules in my opinion, but has cclearly nothing to do with the private choice of not living at your homebase. So let's keep these two issues separate.

[Wageslave]

The Montreal Convention 1999 (which replaced the Warsaw Convention) would not apply to persons travelling on this basis. Passengers require a ticket, even a 'free' ticket.

ExXB makes a very pertinent point. If you are injured or worse on duty you are covered by the company's insurance and compensation system. If a legally ticketed pax then the Montreal Convention is the authority in charge of (limiting) the compensation.
In the case of a false "positionng" crew the airline considers them not on duty and cannot be responsible for compensation whereas the Montreal Convention would not recognise them as pax.
They thus presumably fall between two stools, or in other words they're right in amongst the stools...up to their eyes. Presumably they or their estate would have to sue the airline which then isn't protected by any limitations dictated by the Montreal Convention. When all these ticketless "positioning" shenanigans came out in court the company would be looking a bit sheepish and I suspect the damages would make their eyes water.

Meantime its likely a long, rough road for the employee or his estate. It doesn't take a very pubic crash either, who is liable if the employee falls off the steps for instance? Or breaks bones in turbulence? It strikes me that the employees are very badly exposed in all this.

btw, this is nothing to do with Ryanair bashing, it's to do with some airlines systematically bending or breaking the law to suit their otherwise unsustainable rosters and brutal Ts and Cs, and doing so to the detriment of some of their hardest workers. Why is it anything but good to be flagging this sort of scam up? Except, I suppose, for those employees who find a uniform and id card a useful way to travel any time they like for free, a benefit unavailable to everyone else who isn't working for a flag of convenience carrier.

We know this is illegal. We know people have been threatened with arrest at LHR for doing this. We know most other EU carriers wouldn't dream of bending the system like this. Ireland is subject to the same rules from the same regulatory body as the rest of the EU, inc. the Montreal Convention as regards ticketing. They should abide by them.

[Wageslave]

Midnight cruiser, you seem to have missed the fact that Ryanair are not operating on the US register! How did you miss that?

Are you saying that positioning BA crews not correctly ticketed then, and just walk on with uniform and id?

It's no good wailing that we "should" be able to do this - we'd all love to have such a perk. It's just that it ain't legal.

I also think there is a world of difference between reporting to one regular base and being expected to report anywhere on the route network on day one with travel on an alleged day "off". Isn't that the norm in Ryanair?

[RAT 5]

The topic is being overshadowed by the word 'commuting'. I have BA friends who 'commute' from GVA to LHR/LGW. They use common sense and are expected to be professional in every aspect. They choose to work in A & live in B and accept any risks for their employment should they screw up.
The same can be said of contractors (if they indeed really exist) who end up being based in X and decide to remain living in Y. I would assume that they'd prefer to be based as close as possible to Y as possible, but sometimes, for reasons beyond the wit of man, they are based at the most inconvenient place possible; often a place where there is no direct flight any day of the week, or places without daily flights. It is their professional responsibility to arrange their travel to be a fit state to do their job.
The lucky ones are those who live & work within normal travelling distance.
Where the gripe is bordering on an abuse is where the contractor(?) is then rostered at a couple of days notice to report at a non-normal base way across the network. They start with an early so need to make convoluted A-Z travel arrangements the day before, which is rostered as a day off and no duty. No duty time, no pay, no costs. Is that honest & correct? This to me is the real issue: can this travelling really be non-duty and not accounted for in collective duty time?

[Heathrow Harry]

RAT is correct up to a point - in reality there is no difference from your average office wretch who commutes into London from say Swindon because he/she chose to live there for personal reasons.

The difference is when they ask you to change the pattern at short notice to suit their plans - there should be some compensation in that case

[PENKO]

Wageslave


Some categories of people are not regarded as passengers for APD purposes when they are engaged in duties on a flight. As such, APD is not charged on their carriage. These are:

flight crew
cabin attendants
persons not carried for reward who are
escorting a passenger or goods
undertaking repair, maintenance, safety or security work
ensuring the hygienic preparation and handling of food and drink
These people are also exempt if they carry out the above duties within 72 hours of the flight ending. The same exemption applies to people who begin a return journey within 72 hours after performing any of the above duties provided that they are returning to base, that is the place where they are normally stationed or from where they normally operate.

However, when these people are travelling as passengers, and are not engaged in these duties or returning to base having been engaged in such duties on a previous flight, they are passengers and are chargeable for APD purposes.




A registered commuter can easily be shown to comply with the above.

[PENKO]

Where the gripe is bordering on an abuse is where the contractor(?) is then rostered at a couple of days notice to report at a non-normal base way across the network. They start with an early so need to make convoluted A-Z travel arrangements the day before, which is rostered as a day off and no duty. No duty time, no pay, no costs. Is that honest & correct? This to me is the real issue: can this travelling really be non-duty and not accounted for in collective duty time?

RAT5,
That is a completely different scenario. That's not commuting at all.
Having said that, is this common practice in Ryanair? A friend of mine was moved to a different base only once in five years. Still not ideal, but, well, he knew who he was working for!

[Journey Man]

Without it, a fairly unpleasant and movable job would simply be unbearable.

Or, the job would need to offer more stability and include positioning time in FTLs to become more desirable in order to attract employees.

[RealUlli]

Disclaimer: I'm just an interested SLF, planning to get a PPL some time.

I think what a lot of people here are missing is that Magplug wasn't referring to commuters, he was referring to pilots who are based, e.g. in London but expected to show up for work one week in Rhodes, the next week in Lanzarote, another week in Nuremberg, etc.

If you choose to live far from your base, your commute is your own problem. If your employer offers you to travel his network for free, good for you.

However, if your employer wants you to show up for work at a distant airport, all the regs should apply, the employer should probably pay for a place to stay there and the usual duty time regs should apply for the trip there.

I heard that there are some US airlines that do indeed expect a pilot living and based in Seattle to show up for work in Miami, fly a plane to New York, then maybe another sector to Dallas, leave work and return home. The time between Miami and Dallas is paid and counts towards duty time, the rest is "commute".

Regarding the procedures for getting airside, I think that should be as hassle-free as possible for the pilots. I don't know how it's handled, but as a PPL holder in Germany, you had to get a security background check. After the check, you get a security ID that allows you to get airside with fairly little hassle.

I wonder what would happen if a pilot wants to go on vacation, buys a ticket, checks in normally, however doesn't want to deal with the queue in front of the passenger security and uses his ID for just go airside and board the plane.

[Journey Man]

I wonder what would happen if a pilot wants to go on vacation, buys a ticket, checks in normally, however doesn't want to deal with the queue in front of the passenger security and uses his ID for just go airside and board the plane.

I would have my pass revoked as I am exercising it's privileges whilst not on duty. My employer paid for the pass, not me, so personally I feel jeopardising my employer's reputation is not acceptable.

As a non-scheduled commercial pilot I sit in security lines and am thankful the whole experience is so awful, otherwise I wouldn't be so busy.

[172_driver]

RAT5,
That is a completely different scenario. That's not commuting at all.
Having said that, is this common practice in Ryanair? A friend of mine was moved to a different base only once in five years. Still not ideal, but, well, he knew who he was working for!

It is common practice in Ryanair. Some see half their month being out of base particular times of the year. They're expected to get there on their off days, travelling in uniform without tickets, paying no airport duty, no duty time and minimum rest period.

[woodpecker]

well, where does one start with the perks at BA/VS/KLM/AF? (practically free family LH F tickets ++ etc etc - yikes)

Mmmm, my free BA ticket (two a year) to IAD cost the two of us £330 in taxes/APD etc.

Back to the thread.....

Are we talking about pilots based at Stansted travelling to a short term base transfer outside the UK? If they are they should be on a duty ticket provided by the company.

However, if they are based abroad and simply wanting to come home for their days off surely they should be treated like all other commuters, flying on a rebated staff ticket, paying all the taxes, like other commuters.

[Gertrude the Wombat]

They're expected to get there on their off days
How does that work with minimum wage legislation?

[Icanseeclearly]

I think the point of the thread is being missed by some, this is not about commuting or the rights and wrongs of it, EASA FTLs etc. It is about pilots commuting in their own time in uniform by suddenly becoming part of the crew.

This allows them to use staff search (explicitly forbidden by the dft unless they are on the gendec as part of the operational crew or as supernumerary crew). If they are using this "loophole" then surely they must travel on the flight deck (can you be a supernumerary pilot in the cabin?) be on the pre departure paperwork at the brief and not just arrive on the aircraft and be added to the crew list just prior to departure AND it must count towards their FTL as they are now on duty and it is therefore a working day. I just don't see how this is legal (not withstanding the "perk" of free travel which I a sure the tax man would be interested in as a benefit in kind).

I am a commuter by choice (GLA - LHR) I have to buy a ticket (staff or full fare) and I have to use passenger search in accordance with dft rules, I would lose my airside pass if I used staff search (my company put out a notice about this last year warning it was a disciplinary offence).

I would be interested to know if any other airlines in Europe and specifically the UK allow their staff to travel in this way.

[T250]

A friend of mine who was a dispatcher on Ryanair flights out of a London airport says this commuting is extremely common. Sometimes as common as every other flight, he would have random flight deck crew, always in uniform, come to the departure gate and ask to be put on the loadsheet. They would not count in the TOB in pax paid heads, but they would be in the overall THOB count.

However, they never had any ticketed documentation, only uniform and their airline ID/airside pass.

In order to get airside they therefore went through a staff search channel. This is expressly prohibited at all UK airports unless you are actually on duty and working. These guys commuting are NOT working and are NOT on duty. This is therefore a breach of the DfT rules, unless there has been a discreet agreement made in the background.

An airside pass remains the property of the airport that issued it, can be revoked at any time and does NOT confer rights of access.

Airside IDs are only for use when on duty. These commuters are not on duty, else their commuting trips would count under FTL and they would also be on a ticket (whether full pax ticket or issued by airline for commuting purposes).

If any airport security officer decided to be clever one day, they could well ask these commuting staff if they can prove they are actually on duty and working. They would then be caught out...

[PENKO]

I don't pretend to know all the rules and regulations. Duscussion is fine but if you are going to accuse others of illegal commuting then please back up your claim.

If your friend saw pilots in uniform in the cabin then they were probably regular voluntary commuters. I know many of those and as I already tried to explain above, it is not illegal at all nor is there any tax evasion. It is a standard approved written procedure. If you think it is somehow unfair, then ask your company to adopt those rules that so benefit Ryanair and other European pilots.

[captplaystation]

Last time I went through aircrew security at LGW we had to provide a copy of the sign-in sheet, which was checked against our individual ID's.

I thought I remembered a similar story a couple of years back about STN, so, if Jumpseaters are going through Crew Search I assume a "local arrangement" has been made ? ? I remember this also used to impact heavily on those attempting to access the STN crew room for recurrent ground training which used to be held there (this is a few years ago now though )

In any case, if jumpseat Bods are going through Crew Search day in day out, the fact there are enough little jobsworths in that profession means it sure as hell isn't by accident :hmm:

[jackharr]

As a 17+ year retiree, I am utterly amazed that aircrew can be required to position on days off. Thank goodness my airline AirUK treated people better than that. I have enjoyed these past 17 years. I doubt that many current pilots suffering under such regimes (in effect, working on “days-off”) can look forward to such a pleasant retirement – many won’t live that long being exhausted by such an unfair lifestyle.

I have to ask: “What is the matter with you people that you placidly accept being treated so badly?”

Jack

[Star1101]

Express one international, air contractors ,swift , EAT and the many other company's flying DHL freight have or had the online ticketing system that worked well for a while. There was the comfort knowing you were getting on specific flights to get there.

[beachbumflyer]

Jack,

What is the matter with them?
They have no respect for themselves. When you have no respect for yourself. How are you going to expect others to have any respect for you?

[T250]

PENKO,

I don't pretend to know all the rules and regulations.

So are you trying to insinuate that I do not know all the rules and regulations? I never claimed to know them 'all'

However, there is one rule that I, as well as all airside pass holders at UK airports know (as it is one of many statements signed on a security interview) which is that it is a very strict DfT requirement that to hold an airside pass that you do NOT use it unless on duty. It appears these commuters are however doing this, and therefore in the absence of any local agreement between Ryanair and the airport operating companies that this is at least in breach of regulations and at worst, what you so hastily liked to defend, could be 'illegal' although what law it breaches is unknown to me. It is more the fact you are breaching DfT requirements so your pass can be suspended, withdrawn and therefore your employment terminated.

Duscussion is fine but if you are going to accuse others of illegal commuting then please back up your claim.

First, I never used and never have used, the word 'illegal' so I do not have to back up any claims of what is and isn't legal or illegal. :hmm::ugh:

I am participating in the discussion here, and my original post was a mere statement of the facts as they stand and how it appears they are being breached.

And lastly I couldn't actually give a monkeys if Ryanair is the only airline doing this or all airlines do this, why should I, I'm not employed by one! :ok::oh:

[PENKO]

What captplaystation said.

[BitMoreRightRudder]

I doubt that many current pilots suffering under such regimes (in effect, working on “days-off”) can look forward to such a pleasant retirement – many won’t live that long being exhausted by such an unfair lifestyle.


Unfortunately you are correct Jack. The long term health affect of a 40 year career working max FTLs aren't known yet....but I think we can all guess :uhoh:

[tubby linton]

It is rumoured that the career life expectancy at one loco is ten years.

[4468]

The pros and cons of 'commuting' is a complete and utter red herring here! These are the issues that will land people neck deep in the brown stuff:

1) Dressing in uniform, and using an airside ID, to access the secure area whilst NOT ON DUTY, is both a security breach and I'm fairly sure, in the UK is breaking the law!

2) Receiving a Benefit in kind, (free travel) without declaring it for tax purposes, is tax evasion.

3) Anyone listed as supernumary crew, is engaged ON DUTY which must count towards FTL limits. Failing to declare such duty time is definitely breaking the law, and is wreckless.

Which category are these FR pilots in?

This can't possibly end well!

These folks are extremely exposed!

[172_driver]

Do you know that to be the case? - I am told that is definitely NOT the case (floating 5/5 contractors aside, who just about would have a compliant roster, whether it was a day off or not), - But word I got was; its every night in your own bed - or is it just the contractors who are travelling out of base? What about accomodation/hotac when out of base? - If based crew are actually being REQUIRED to POSITION out of BASE on a day off, then I would agree that it is unacceptable, but Ive never heard of this for based/employed pilots.

I know that to be the case. I could fish out the evidence from my old Duty Plans. They're a year old or so, I am ex RYR, but it was happening then and it's happening now. No duty time, no minimum rest, no tickets.

I have met Ryanair employee pilots out of base, but it's rare. Company then becomes responsible for accommodation + transportation. I would assume your mate is on a Ryanair contract and thus his experience is 'every night in your own bed'. Contractors are sent all over the place. To clarify, those are contractors with assigned bases being rostered out of another base.

PS. Tried to send you a PM midnight cruiser, if interested could you change the settings to allow you to receive PMs.

[111boy]

" It DOES work, so, instead of coming on here stirring up something that works pretty well for the hordes of pilots commuting, usually because they cannot get a home base &/or are unwilling to relocate to the base given . . . . . can't you just put a sock in it & leave well alone


I have reason to question your motives here, and doubt they could be in any way intended to be for the benefit of those involved (which I would hazard a guess you aren't, & if you are , did you never hear the Anglo Saxon saying "don't s**t in your own nest" ) "

THIS IS WHAT HE SAID

Lets not question HIS motives, ( wanna be ryanair management )... like the tax situation, money bags, contracts, we question because it is so very questionable

Like almost everything else in Ryanair, it's questionable, their approach is something like ..... " lets see what we can get away with "

Their approach to the new EASA FTL's .... lets ignore them/ lets see what we can get away with, it's pretty clear that this is NOT legal.

They will call you on days off, before and after your standby, they will let you position when it would NOT satisfy legal requirements.

Ryanair say " always getting better " what they mean is " mostly getting away with it " I for one can't wait for the inevitable, when they get caught .

[ManaAdaSystem]

As the SLF says, if the airport is OK with the process, why add to the hassle for the pilot (which hardly enhances flight safety, does it)?

How would the airport know if a pilot in uniform is flying or not?

[111boy]

That's how they get away with it, most jumpseaters would not admit that when going through security

[4468]

How would the airport know if a pilot in uniform is flying or not
As we all clearly understand. If you turn up at staff search, in uniform, accessing airside using your ID. You are declaring you are operating/on duty.

That declaration is easily confirmed by a simple check of one's roster.

God help the first one checked, who's roster shows them to be on a day off!

I imagine the high security facility at Belmarsh might correctly be the destination for most airport workers attempting that?

[172_driver]

Even in the UK, I have been referred to staff channel when positioning off duty. Presumably because I had uniform and company ID. Should I have put them straight!?

[PENKO]

Hold on guys. There are tens if not hundreds of commuters who pass through security, identify themselves as commuters and follow all the rules as laid down BLACK AND WHITE in their operations manuals, which are signed by the managers and countersigned by all the relevant authorities. Why on earth some of you guys insist that it is all some sort of clandestine operation is beyond me. At best you can argue that there is an overlap between the different rules regarding FTL's, airside passes and common sense. In that case why not be thankful that airlines and the authorities are applying common sense regarding this issue?

Remember the Ryanair captain who rather unwisely allowed multiple commuters to sit in the toilet for takeoff? It was all over the news in the whole of Europe! Surely the authorities would have clamped down on commuting if it was illegal, following this incident.

[wiggy]

Even in the UK, I have been referred to staff channel when positioning off duty. Presumably because I had uniform and company ID. Should I have put them straight!?

I think it depends on the airport, it's geography, and if there are any local arrangements with regards to the dreaded "conformance".

Certainly were I work we have fairly recently received a routine reminder of the consequences of using Staff search when not on duty, and the consequences of using a Staff ID to gain access to air side when not on Duty ...and it's pretty much as 4468 as described....(FWIW last time I looked even our positioning crews ex-base are banned from using the Staff process)

If the FR guys have local agreements best of luck to them.

[PENKO]

Some of you here would even argue that a captain on a cruise ship should be punished, or at least heavily taxed for
a. being provided accommodation
b. allowed to travel for free when not on duty
c. being on his vessel in his spare time without accruing duty time, yet using his i.d. to order lunch!

The more I think of it, the more I envy said captain!

[wiggy]

Out of interest which "familiar group" is that?

[4468]

Laying aside the alleged rights and the wrongs
You're laying them aside. I'm just pointing them out. For anyone who doesn't wish to bury their head in the sand.

No arrogance, schadenfreude or stones required.

PENKO
Hold on guys. There are tens if not hundreds of commuters who pass through security, identify themselves as commuters and follow all the rules as laid down BLACK AND WHITE in their operations manuals, which are signed by the managers and countersigned by all the relevant authorities. Why on earth some of you guys insist that it is all some sort of clandestine operation is beyond me
Are these commuters on duty, or are they ticketed passengers. Either is fine, but to attempt to be both, to take advantage of the 'pros' of each,and the 'cons' of neither, most definitely is, as you yourself say, clandestine. A good description in fact.

[UAV689]

Really sad to see pilots stirring up a storm in tea cup for their contemporaries. No wonder the industry as gone to pot when we all try and get each other in the brown stuff.

So sad.

[SD.]

The pros and cons of 'commuting' is a complete and utter red herring here! These are the issues that will land people neck deep in the brown stuff:

1) Dressing in uniform, and using an airside ID, to access the secure area whilst NOT ON DUTY, is both a security breach and I'm fairly sure, in the UK is breaking the law!

2) Receiving a Benefit in kind, (free travel) without declaring it for tax purposes, is tax evasion.

3) Anyone listed as supernumary crew, is engaged ON DUTY which must count towards FTL limits. Failing to declare such duty time is definitely breaking the law, and is wreckless.

Which category are these FR pilots in?


As a FR CONTRACTOR, they fit in to all 3. A contractor may be rostered away from his own base (and some find themselves out of base 50% of the time) others are left alone to operate in their assigned base. All positioning at the behest of the operator is not recorded and it's down to the individual to position to the base. This could be a drive from STN to MAN, or a 3 legged position to the arse end of nowhere. That ever so famous 5/4 roster pattern becomes a 7/2 if the connections don't work.

As a FR EMPLOYEE. All out of base work, the deadhead flights are recorded as duty, ticketed and HOTAC paid for by the company.


Really sad to see pilots stirring up a storm in tea cup for their contemporaries. No wonder the industry as gone to pot when we all try and get each other in the brown stuff. I see this thread as a means of highlighting how certain legislation is circumnavigated by airlines.

[LlamaFarmer]

The pros and cons of 'commuting' is a complete and utter red herring here! These are the issues that will land people neck deep in the brown stuff:

1) Dressing in uniform, and using an airside ID, to access the secure area whilst NOT ON DUTY, is both a security breach and I'm fairly sure, in the UK is breaking the law!

2) Receiving a Benefit in kind, (free travel) without declaring it for tax purposes, is tax evasion.

3) Anyone listed as supernumary crew, is engaged ON DUTY which must count towards FTL limits. Failing to declare such duty time is definitely breaking the law, and is wreckless.

Which category are these FR pilots in?

This can't possibly end well!

These folks are extremely exposed!

So it's tax evasion if your company provides you with meals during your working day?

Not just an airline example but any place of employment. Free travel is no different from free lunch surely.

What about bus drivers who use their id to travel around the bus network for free.

[FlightDetent]

So it's tax evasion if your company provides you with meals during your working day?

Not just an airline example but any place of employment. Free travel is no different from free lunch surely.

What about bus drivers who use their id to travel around the bus network for free. Careful with that, you may not like the answer too much. On the continent, yes it would be.

[captplaystation]

111boy


"Lets not question HIS motives, ( wanna be ryanair management )..."


:D :) ;) :rolleyes: you certainly cracked me up with that one (seems you still haven't forgiven me for my "slight" when I posted a slightly sarcastic response to your somewhat naive view of the postings on here about Arik Air some time back)

In fact the truth of the matter as regards MY motives, are as posted by

"UAV689 Really sad to see pilots stirring up a storm in tea cup for their contemporaries. No wonder the industry as gone to pot when we all try and get each other in the brown stuff.

So sad."


Indeed, tis very sad to see back-stabbing/ sh1t-stirring migrate from management into fellow line pilots. . . . . . . invidious that they are missing so many "special" aspects of life in Ryanair :ugh: You couldn't make it up. . . . . . .

[4468]

I see this thread as a means of highlighting how certain legislation is circumnavigated by airlines.
Thanks SD, precisely my point. Those that feel uncomfortable with the requirement to do this, need protection from their employer. FR should find an alernative solution to their rostering requirements. Those that think it's a wizard wheeze, that can only exist if it's kept in the shadows, frankly need to have the book thrown at them.

[Sallytraffic]

Under the current system a boarding card is obtained landslide from the service agent, so passing through security as pax.
It works

[PENKO]

4468, again, these procedures are written, signed and countersigned by the authorities. They are not specific to any one airline. Airports around Europe fully co-operate with these commuting procedures. I am amazed that you choose to ignore this fact.

[Tu.114]

What about bus drivers who use their id to travel around the bus network for free.

In Germany and increasingly as well in Austria, such a thing is called "geldwerter Vorteil" (roughly "advantage with monetary value"). This is indeed taxable and well noted by the taxmen.

[4468]

PENKO

Are these 'commuting' pilots on duty, or off duty?

Thanks

[RAT 5]

Really sad to see pilots stirring up a storm in tea cup for their contemporaries. No wonder the industry as gone to pot when we all try and get each other in the brown stuff.

Are these 'commuting' pilots on duty, or off duty?

This is the crux. Forget about all the blah about local agreements and using ID's. Who cares. No-one is trying to get anyone in the brown stuff. In fact it is the opposite. If you are on duty then it has be to credited and 5/3 or 5/4 means just that, not 7/2 as someone quoted. Whether you are paid for positioning is a matter for your contract and conscience; and positioning should not be commuting. But why do people want to defend working for no pay AND no duty time credit. If you do then you have put yourself in the brown stuff along with many others.

[captplaystation]

Revisiting the original post, the complaint was 3 fold.

1 , that pilots are positioning themselves around Europe at the companies behest in their own time. I have not had sight of a Contract involving "floating Contractors", but, I don't believe anyone had to sign for this in preference to being allocated a Base, and, if I remember, it attracted a higher hourly payment, and a 5/5 roster (which as many have pointed out , could easily end up as 7/2 depending where you have to get to on a particular week ). So, those that signed for it have to put up with the faffing around their choice entails, fair no ?
Other Contractors seen moving themselves around Europe in their "free time" are indeed in their free time, as they are "commuting", and choose not to live at their own base. This group I am led to believe , comprised of based contractors & normal Ryanair employees are the biggest percentage by far these days.

2 - Staff Security search points are being misused . . . . . as I stated earlier, I cannot see this floating at a Base like STN, where many of the security staff were pretty awful in the time I went through there, & would certainly not have hesitated to make cr@p for any pilot of whom they believed even a remote chance of nailing existed. I think it is unfeasible that some local arrangement has not been made here ,& at the other larger bases, too many guys going through each day for it not to be noticed.

3 - Ryanair are positioning people all over the place without counting it as duty. . . . . no, because it is no more duty than Capt Bloggs driving from Norwich to Stansted if that is his desire, & is simply "the pilot getting to work in his free time".


Now, what is so complicated about this , that it has taken 7 pages for the penny to drop for some of you ? :rolleyes:

[T250]

So can an FR employee or anyone else for that matter confirm that there is/are local agreements between the airports in the UK and Ryanair that Ryanair staff can use staff channels and security IDs even when not on duty?

If this cannot be confirmed then the previous points still stand. Just because it potentially breaches DfT regulations and might cause you some inconvenience doesn't mean the fact and legislation can simply be ignored and swept under the carpet.

So is there local agreements or isn't there? Simple question, requires 1 word answer. :ugh::hmm:

[4468]

because it is no more duty than Capt Bloggs driving from Norwich to Stansted if that is his desire, & is simply "the pilot getting to work in his free time".
Captain Bloggs driving from Stansted to Norwich, is not required to do so in uniform. Nor does he have to use his airside ID to access any restricted areas. Nor does he have to be listed as Supernumary Crew.

Is YOUR penny dropping yet??

Are these commuting pilots on duty, or off duty?

It really is a remarkably simple question. Why won't anyone answer it?

Thanks

[aerobat]

At Stansted jump seat crew have the same status as passengers and if arriving in STN must exit through customs / immigration, not VP2. There is a directors notice that is quite explicit about this.

[172_driver]

1 , that pilots are positioning themselves around Europe at the companies behest in their own time. I have not had sight of a Contract involving "floating Contractors", but, I don't believe anyone had to sign for this in preference to being allocated a Base, and, if I remember, it attracted a higher hourly payment, and a 5/5 roster (which as many have pointed out , could easily end up as 7/2 depending where you have to get to on a particular week ). So, those that signed for it have to put up with the faffing around their choice entails, fair no ?
Other Contractors seen moving themselves around Europe in their "free time" are indeed in their free time, as they are "commuting", and choose not to live at their own base. This group I am led to believe , comprised of based contractors & normal Ryanair employees are the biggest percentage by far these days.

Maybe I missed something, but did you not leave out a fairly big group - the based contractors sent out of base? It's happening right now, every day of the week, somewhere around the network. Transporting themselves around the network, sometimes up to 3 flights, traveling for 14-15 hrs, coming in on a late wave arrival for an early wave departure as operating crew. Can't argue it's not at the behest of the company.

[Wageslave]

Contrast the support of this blatantly illegal practice with the universal disbelief and condemnation when it was introduced, producing contractor's rosters that required this bizarre nomadic neither on nor off duty lifestyle some years ago, with all the same arguments about legality thrown up but ignored by the authorities (esp the authorit-IE). The whole industry was up in arms against it and no one defended it at all. Now we have descended into a situation where the very employees of the miscreant company, apparently, are trying to deny it happens or maintain it is fair and reasonable!

Its been known as a copper-bottomed fact for years that this iniquitous situation exists!

Truly, some pilots are their industry's own worst enemy to the detriment of the industry as a whole. Do these roll-over-and-die company-brainwashed wh@res have no shame?

Disgraceful. Utterly disgraceful.

[PDR1]

I'm not a pilot - I'm an engineer. I frequently have to be at company sites other than my home base (as much as 300 miles away) and quite often have to travel to and from these sites outside normal working time. When I do I don't get paid for the extra time (or get time off in lieu), but the company either pays the mileage rate or provides a hire car (my choice). When travelling I am expected to abide by the company codes of conduct regardless of whether it is within normal working hours or not.

Why is it any different for pilots?

PDR

[xollob]

What an interesting discussion, I don't work for FR but have to say I broke it down into captplaystations latest post observations also.

The commuting thing I see as each to their own, happens in probably most airlines, so long as done to achieve sensible rest period prior to operating don't see the excitement.

The airside ID thing and what channel to use, I can't get overly excited about it, who cares !

What does irk me though (for the FR guys) if I have understood correctly is that you have to travel in your own time to start a series of duties which is at a base other than your "on paper" home base, is that correct ? Then surely that is simply a duty requirement at the behest of your employer (whoever that may be) which therefore invalidates said day off as a day off for the purposes of ensuring adequate legal days off are provided ? I apologise if I have misinterpreted and this last paragraph is incorrect.

As I understand it every airline governed by EU regulations has a requirement to record any duty on behalf of the employer as duty (flight, positioning, standby etc etc) appropriately and failing to do so is failing to comply with FTL's.

If this is indeed happening can't all FR pilots simply file an MOR with the Relevant authority /chirp and escalating this to the point where an ops inspector for the relevant country/authority has to act ? (Or find a way to do this through a chosen body without name to avoid persecution ?)

Surely the goal would be that all positioning at the behest of the company becomes included in rostered "5 days on" period thus producing a win for the pilots and a win for the customers as the FR pilots are then being properly protected by the relevant EASA FTL's ? Providing a better lifestyle for pilots, more rested pilots for the operation and a requirement for more pilots as part of the "5 on" period is now taken by positioning time, thus driving the company to provide more crew at relevant bases (more opportunities for people to have the base they want) instead of paying people to position and stay in hotels ?

Hard hat on preparing for incoming. I don't see it as anyone trying to screw anyone, other than an employer who seems to have a unique interpretation of what constitutes a "duty" ? I apologise if FR do not actually expect people to position themselves to start a series of duties from anything other then their nominated home base in their rest periods/days off.

[xollob]

PDR, the difference is that there is a legal number of hours a pilot may fly as a crew member (flight hours) and be on duty (flying, standby, being positioned around country/world).

There are 7 day limits, 14. 28, monthly , yearly limits etc.

A bit like an HGV driver can only do so much before he/she must pull over for a rest of a minimum duration. Any HGV driver found to be driving with the tachometer disconnected gets in serious trouble. An employer bound by flight time limitations has a responsibility, as well as the crew member to jointly ensure these limits are not exceeded.

I think that was the question you were asking ? :)

[wiggy]

PDR

Why is it any different for pilots?.. Because the law says so and as xollob has said it's all about the legal restrictions on pilot's working hours.

As a pilot in the employ of an airline you usually have a nominated home base (e.g. LGW). Getting between home and base is down to the individual ( and I think that's what most mean when they refer to "commuting"). The timing of that journey doesn't count as Duty time because it's construction (time of day, time of journey, means of travel) is down to the individual.

OTOH if you are at your designated home base and the employer decides to send you elsewhere to start a block of work (e.g. "we want you to go from LGW to CDG and operate out of there for a few days ) then that journey is usually regarded as "positioning" (or "dead heading" ), is organised by the airline and traditionally/legally it's regarded as part of your regulated duties and so the hours spent doing so count against legal limits - because it is being done solely at the behest of the operator.

I know it can sound like semantics, but the devil is in the detail - especially if the regulator(s) gets involved...

[captplaystation]

172 driver

"Maybe I missed something, but did you not leave out a fairly big group - the based contractors sent out of base? It's happening right now, every day of the week, somewhere around the network. Transporting themselves around the network, sometimes up to 3 flights, traveling for 14-15 hrs, coming in on a late wave arrival for an early wave departure as operating crew. Can't argue it's not at the behest of the company."



If that is the case, then I stand corrected on that front. I wasn't aware that "Based Contractors" were being rostered out of other bases with no provision for getting there provided by the company. In that case, I will agree with that point, as that is assuredly duty time, if it is something you have not agreed to do as part of your contract, and an additional burden the company is placing on you. So, yes, unless these guys have "agreed" :hmm: (maybe in preference to being laid off if their base is shrinking/seasonal ) to operate temporarily from another base, getting to & from the new location "should" be the companies responsibility, and "should" be recorded as duty time.

I know a few Bods based in GRO have to operate from BCN during the Winter months, I "assume" that is with some degree of consent on their part ? but it may be the "consent" has been given as the alternative offered was staying at home & earning diddly squat from Oct-Apr.

[RAT 5]

At Sports Direct recently, which is under investigation for employment abuses of contract workers, there was one topic discussed on the radio. It was a common practice for workers to be subjected to a 15mins security check after work, but after their shift had finished, and thus in their own time. It was at the behest of the company. When questioned the chief of the UK Institute of Directors said it was unacceptable to expect workers to carry out company requested duties for no pay. It had to be within duty time or within extended paid hours.
Do contractors get paid for ground duties outside base? Is the travelling time rostered as duty and logged? If so then positioning for out of base flights is no different.

[Wageslave]

As I recall these contracts were introduced some 5-6 years ago and the carrot for being "unbased" was a pretty high salary for a loco with most if not almost all based on sector pay and on a self employed basis so no tax, welfare, pension, holidays, sick pay or anything else. In conversation with mates in the company it seems that sometimes you could be in the remote base for a week, sometimes only a day or two and then move to another during the working week necessitating a return from yet another place and change in hotac. All positioning hotac and transfers/transport were the contractor's own responsibility.
Imagine the amount of work involved (on days "off") not only planning the positioning flights but also arranging your own accommodation and working out transport from there to the airport and back every day!
This is why the rest of the industry was aghast at the idea - hardly surprisingly. Have I got the details about right, anyone?

I know a few Bods based in GRO have to operate from BCN during the Winter months, I "assume" that is with some degree of consent on their part ? but it may be the "consent" has been given as the alternative offered was staying at home & earning diddly squat from Oct-Apr.
Indeed, the "consent" was either change base with no doubt accom at your own expense or go several months on no pay.

Forget raising this with the IAA. They're a paper tiger (well, paper hamster) at best and anyway they sanctioned it in the first place so can't go back on that decision - and are so hand in glove with the company they'd do nothing to upset them.

You'd need to start a class action in the courts - and with no union because the company won't tolerate one the pilots are out on their own and just grateful to have a job, something widely believed likely to disappear if they cause any "trouble".

it's a

[zerotohero]

An old Brookfield contract used to say something in the region of

The pilot is responsible for maintaining his own FTL’s in accordance with IAA regulations.

So that means you would have to inform Ryanair if your going over those by positioning as operating crew which is what you are classed as in uniform.

Also out of base work attracts or used to attract an extra €20 per block hour flying. That was to cover all travel expenses, Hotels Meals etc...... Read that as maybe buying a ticket.

Ops Part A states that you can travel as crew as long as you are available to act as crew if requested and is subject to FTL's

In a nut shell I see all this leans towards Ryanair will allow you to position etc and act as crew to save them booking your flight you can do it how you see fit to save fatigue and balance your life . But its on your head to inform them if your exceeding FTL's and not available to work. As the contractors are limited to 900 hours a year and they generally all want the 900 to pay for the loans and type rating no one is ringing up and saying "Hey I recon I am out of hours due jumpseating now" As the question would be raised why did you not use your €20psbh pay to buy a cheap ticket as thats what its for.

Stir the pot and it will probably mean a lot of guys lose out on seeing there families as much as they will have to stay in base on days off.

[Magplug]

The angle about using staff travel concessions being tax evasion is a complete red-herring in the UK. As all (ticketed) staff travel is sub-load it means that a seat is never guaranteed, therefore HMRC cannot nominate ST as a tangible 'benefit in kind' for taxation purposes.

Of course if travel is made available 'off the books' for pilots to position to their next duty on legally required days-off then who will be the wiser? You could even write into your Ops Man A that FTLs are entirely the responsibility of the pilot and nothing to do with the company....

When you operate an airline under an authority that exercises absolutely NO oversight it is quite amazing the things you can get away with!

[sunbird123]

I'm sure that what applies to Ryanair should apply to the other big airline in the uk.They have many living in france who commute to work.From what i have seen many commute on the same day as their work day.

[No Fly Zone]

When the doors are closed and the engines are turning, a Non-Rev seat occupant is just that. Some are obviously commuters and some are otherwise. Cabin seats are more comfortable, but not always available. If one wants to get home - or to work - a jump seat will work. Some are eligible and others are not. Rules may vary a little between airlines and countries, but much less than one may expect. At the end of the day (or the workweek?), one is always better off flying with one's own company and, home company or not, one must absolutely know the rules. Why so much chatter in a very simple subject?:ugh:

[172_driver]

What does irk me though (for the FR guys) if I have understood correctly is that you have to travel in your own time to start a series of duties which is at a base other than your "on paper" home base, is that correct ? Then surely that is simply a duty requirement at the behest of your employer (whoever that may be) which therefore invalidates said day off as a day off for the purposes of ensuring adequate legal days off are provided ? I apologise if I have misinterpreted and this last paragraph is incorrect.

All correct.

[LlamaFarmer]

At Sports Direct recently, which is under investigation for employment abuses of contract workers, there was one topic discussed on the radio. It was a common practice for workers to be subjected to a 15mins security check after work, but after their shift had finished, and thus in their own time. It was at the behest of the company. When questioned the chief of the UK Institute of Directors said it was unacceptable to expect workers to carry out company requested duties for no pay. It had to be within duty time or within extended paid hours.
Do contractors get paid for ground duties outside base? Is the travelling time rostered as duty and logged? If so then positioning for out of base flights is no different.

I think a big point was that they were already on NMW, so this time spent unpaid at their employers behest took them below the legal minimum wage.


On the other hand take an airline pilot paid per-flying-hour and they're going to be earning a lot more than NMW per flying hour.
That'll probably still be a fair bit more than NMW when you factor in unpaid duty such as pre-flight brief, turnarounds, debrief, unpaid positioning etc


Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with it at all, but I think there is a big legal difference between the two cases.

[Dont Hang Up]

Why so much chatter in a very simple subject?


..because people are arguing about what it means to be "on duty" in at least three different contexts...

1)Airside security
2)Employee Ts and Cs
3)Taxable benefits

...each of which can legitimately have a different definition of the term.

;)

[4468]

Quote:
Why so much chatter in a very simple subject?

..because people are arguing about what it means to be "on duty" in at least three different contexts...

1)Airside security
2)Employee Ts and Cs
3)Taxable benefits

...each of which can legitimately have a different definition of the term.
Not quite.

The main issue about being 'on duty' is that it is at the behest of the employer. As such, it must be recorded for FTL purposes. If you are on duty, you can be required to be in uniform, you can use your ID to access the secure area, you can travel as supernumary crew. Not a problem!

If you are off duty, you cannot be required to be in uniform, you have no business using your ID to access the secure area of an airport without a ticket, and you most definitely can never be described as supernumary CREW! ( The clue's in the name!) Being 'off' duty does not accrue FTL restrictions.

So midnight cruiser, and sunbird123, the pilots to whom you refer (working for an airline with a healthier regard to the law?) are no more, nor less than ticketed passengers, travelling on public transport. The fact they are also pilots is utterly irrelevant! For all the reasons I have quoted, they are off duty!

Why can't anyone answer the very simple question I have posed?

Are these FR pilots, who are travelling in uniform, using their ID to access the airport secure area, and listed as supernumary crew, ON duty, or OFF duty??

Either is fine! Attempting to be both is either duplicitous, or stupid! Each of which deserves to be dealt with appropriately.

[Fogie]

Hi,
An airline is responsible to manage FTLs and fatigue, under their SMS and FRM/FRMS. This is clearly defined in EASA Cat ops regulations.

An individual licence holder is responsible to report fit to fly.

Home base definition is being amended from Feb 2016 ftl introduction.
The emphasis on a high degree of permanence is explicit in the legislation.

Might be worthwhile to read the relevant info, and prevent a potential licensing issue.

“duty” means any task that a crew member performs for the operator, including flight duty, administrative work, giving or receiving training and checking, POSITIONING, and some elements of standby;

“home base” means the location, assigned by the operator to the crew member, from where the crew member normally starts and ends a duty period or a series of duty periods and where, under normal circumstances, the operator is not responsible for the accommodation of the crew member concerned;"

"positioning means the transferring of a non-operating crew member from one place to another, at the behest of the operator, excluding:
- the time of travel from a private place of rest to the designated reporting place at home base and vice versa, and
- the time for local transfer from a place of rest to the commencement of duty and vice versa;"

ORO.FTL.200 Home Base
An operator shall assign a home base to each crew member.
CS FTL.1.200 Home Base
(a) The home base is a single airport location assigned with a high degree of permanence.
(b) In the case of a change of home base, the first recurrent extended recovery rest period prior to starting duty at the new home base is increased to 72 hours, including 3 local nights. Travelling time between the former home base and the new home base is positioning.

:ugh::ugh:

[Lightbringer]

I'we heard rumors of 6-6 schedule(3 earlys then 3 lates). 6 days ON then with of 1 day commute, 4 days of 1 day commute.

[111boy]

Or 8 on 4 off ...then ?

[Twiglet1]

Depone
True but it would significantly hit the extended recovery rest period if crew are having to include the pax day on a 'day off' ?
There seems to be two issues here;
Crews travelling day before / before FDP
FR contract crews traveling from where they live to any base
I heard that EASA definition of home base was aimed at FR !!

[PENKO]

If you are off duty, you cannot be required to be in uniform, you have no business using your ID to access the secure area of an airport without a ticket, and you most definitely can never be described as supernumary CREW! ( The clue's in the name!) Being 'off' duty does not accrue FTL restrictions.

The clue is in the status of a commuter. All authorities agree on this status except you, 4468.
Let's look at it from a different perspective, why should an airline NOT facilitate its off duty crew to travel on empty seats if these employees can prove that they travel between their home and their aircraft? It is not as if these companies are handing out freebees, it's the nature of air transport that homes can be hundreds of miles away from base. So why do you object to airlines and regulators who find a way to accommodate commuters?

[Basil]

Many people have had their say and I now suggest, with respect, that the OP delete this thread.

[JW411]

What a bloody good idea.

[4468]

Many people have had their say and I now suggest, with respect, that the OP delete this thread.
Oh I'm afraid I'll have to disagree Basil!

I can certainly see why some would want this issue swept under the carpet. Hidden from view. DELETED! I very much hope the owning authorities are made aware of this issue, and provide clarity, where 'some' think there's a grey area, that they can exploit!

Then there'll be no need for opinions!

[T250]

4468 is spot in his recent comments!

We still haven't established if FR crews are using their airside IDs to access the restricted area of UK airports when they are not on duty.

So is it OK to just breach DfT rules and airport security for similar reasons such as just randomly going airside whenever you feel like it, whether that be to go shopping airside, plane spotting, meet your family/friends, steal luggage perhaps or maybe even jump on a random company aircraft for free to fly off to a random base?

Doesn't sound too good, if there isn't local agreements in place between Ryanair and UK airport operators. In the absence of any such agreement, what you are doing is a serious breach of DfT regulations.

Other low cost UK airlines do NOT participate in this practice and therefore why should FR, especially if in the process you are breaching DfT regulations and deserve to therefore have your airside pass withdrawn which in turn can lead to the non return of said pass and therefore ultimately termination of your employment. :hmm::=

As an airline, FR can do whatever the hell it wants WITHIN the regulations of its staff using their airside IDs. FR should not be compelling or inciting their staff to use their passes when not on duty. Why are they simply not provided with tickets (fare or paid/unpaid/staff rate) and then go through normal pax security. There would be no issue at all with that, and that is how all other UK airlines operate. So why are you guys at FR the exception???

[111boy]

Closing down the thread equals sweeping it under the carpet. If you don't like it, don't read or participate. Gentlemen could you tell us why you want the discussion closed please ?

[LlamaFarmer]

As an airline, FR can do whatever the hell it wants WITHIN the regulations of its staff using their airside IDs. FR should not be compelling or inciting their staff to use their passes when not on duty. Why are they simply not provided with tickets (fare or paid/unpaid/staff rate) and then go through normal pax security. There would be no issue at all with that, and that is how all other UK airlines operate. So why are you guys at FR the exception???

If load factors are high and flights overbooked then staff travel would be the first to get hit, unless they are on a must-fly ticket, which they would only be if the company desperately needs them to travel.

If it was just commuting to/from base on either side of a series of duties, I fear many airlines, particularly FR, would boot them off the flight.

In the case of the cabin being full, would they then be able to jump seat with a ticket?

[PENKO]

T250, it would not hurt to do a bit more research before posting blatant inaccurate accusations and threats. This thread is now really descending into needless and careless mud slinging. There is only so much detail one can post on a public forum, so I'll leave it this.

All I can say to some of you is: relax, if you want to 'run around airside whenever you want', then just buy any random 9 pound Ryanair ticket! It's much easier to do that than for a commuter to commute. Take care!

[1201alarm]

We still haven't established if FR crews are using their airside IDs to access the restricted area of UK airports when they are not on duty.

Who cares about that? Whoever is responsible for the aircrew security channels can deal with it, if he really thinks he is overwhelmed by people using that lane. I couldn't care less. Aircrew have my trust, whether they are on duty or not. We should stop making each others life difficult. If Ryanair crew can pax for free in uniform, good on them, they seem to have it hard enough in general.

The main issue about being 'on duty' is that it is at the behest of the employer. As such, it must be recorded for FTL purposes.

If there are indeed airlines who position crews from their nominated homebase to another base in their network, without registering this travel time for the purpose of duty and rest time calculations, that would be very strange in my opinion.

As fogie put it, the new EASA regulations seem to close any loopholes who might have existed so far. Rightly so, such loopholes give an unfair competitive advantage.

[T250]

T250, it would not hurt to do a bit more research before posting blatant inaccurate accusations and threats.
I am stating the facts which any FR employee with a UK airport issued airside pass should be aware of, and regardless if they are aware or not, is bound by. Is this inaccurate? It is as simple as grabbing your own airside ID, turning it over onto the reverse side, and the first line on the back states very clearly 'This card is for identification only and does not confer right of access'

Who cares about that? Whoever is responsible for the aircrew security channels can deal with it, if he really thinks he is overwhelmed by people using that lane. I couldn't care less. Aircrew have my trust, whether they are on duty or not. We should stop making each others life difficult. If Ryanair crew can pax for free in uniform, good on them, they seem to have it hard enough in general.

Let's all abide by the same rules then or let's have no rules at all!

I'm sure that ATC staff, managers and security staff overall have more trust than most other airside workers, however I doubt they disregard the DfT regulations as much as this FR commuters issue does.

It isn't the fact that we are making 'life difficult' is is merely all conforming to the same rules as each other, else like I said earlier, let's dispose of all the rules altogether! :oh:

What makes FR aircrew so special that they are the only airside workers and the only UK airline that disregards the rules?

[PENKO]

I am stating the facts which any FR employee with a UK airport issued airside pass should be aware of, and regardless if they are aware or not, is bound by. Is this inaccurate? It is as simple as grabbing your own airside ID, turning it over onto the reverse side, and the first line on the back states very clearly 'This card is for identification only and does not confer right of access'
Yes? So they identify themselves as a commuter and security grants them access as per existing regulations at all airports.

[T250]

Yes? So they identify themselves as a commuter and security grants them access as per existing regulations at all airports.

Do they also identify themselves as not being on duty? :rolleyes:

Like 4468 previously said, if they identify themselves as commuting but OFF duty then they should be redirected to passenger search. Regardless of what security tell them or allow them to do, it is their pass that is on the line.

If they identify themselves as commuting but ON duty then by all means carry on, that is what the whole point of having airside passes and staff channels is about! Not to access airside off duty, therefore with no legitimate reason to be present airside.

To present it another way, how would it be different for example from the son of an FR pilot who happens to work at the airport in another capacity (cleaner, but holds an airside ID) who wants to fly with his father who is flying out of the airport. The son/daughter is not on duty, they are on a day off, but they go through staff security using their airside ID and then proceed to the gate where their father is the pilot of the flight and they gain access to the aircraft and depart with their father out of the airport.

Is that or isn't that a breach of DfT regulations? If it is, then it is also a breach regardless of who does it, be they aircrew, ground crew, shop staff or cleaners.

[oceancrosser]

One of the most ridiculous threads I have seen on here (and it keeps getting worse). Wannabe´s and D(a)fT pundits.
There is clearly a reason UK Security procedures are among the worst worldwide.

[PENKO]

T250, commuting as off duty crew is legitimate.

[Journey Man]

I think people are just fed up of the turkeys voting for Christmas.

[jmmoric]

There are a few things implemented to make the whole aviation industry, and all it's regulations, a little simpler and make things go a little smoother without all the hassle security and paperbureaucrats are dumping down on us all these days...

I genuily feel that, as with the thread about ATC in the US, this thread is created by a "youngster" who may have missed the point here, and want to look at every sentence and comma in a book, and in the end make things even more absurd and coomplicated than they really are...

Our job is rather simple, moving people from A to B, and work together to be able to do it fast and efficient.... And we're all really good at it :)

Take it easy, enjoy the flow that keep things moving, and help work in that direction... Think about the implications of questions before asking them, you may well have shot yourself in the foot ;)

[4468]

PENKO
T250, commuting as off duty crew is legitimate.
So you're saying FR pilots are dressing in uniform, accessing the secure area with their ID, and listing themselves as operating (supernumary) crew, when they are actually OFF duty?

All purely and simply, to avoid purchasing a ticket, and just 'commuting' as a passenger.

That's correct isn't it.

I suspect a number of agencies ought to be very interested in this. Let's get the situation clarified, to avoid anyone putting themselves in a difficult position, eh?

[xollob]

I actually think the element relating to the expectations of pilot to undertake duties at the behest of the employer on their days off is an important issue. We have seen may things change in a Period of time in the industry and what would have once been no way Jose becomes the norm, or it's okay, there is the proverbial race or the bottom. I am not in any way implying FR have created this (I'm sure there are varying opinions)however as professionals I'd like to think we can all agree that any employer not complying with flight time limitations to reduce the legally required rest/ days off of a crew member in order to increase productive of pilots/employees is not a good thing for any pilot ?

This is, IMHO an important issue which needs to be picked up by the relevant flight ops inspector to make things better for all involved (other than anyones who has a focus to squeeze more out of pilots for nothing in return).At what point does enough become enough, what if FR went transatlantic and the line of work originated in e.g. East Coast USA and you were expected to make your way there on your day off/rest period.... That might sound a little extreme, but 15 years ago if someone said what happens today would be happening the response would have probably been, no way ! It has to stop at some point, can't you all just hit the likes of chirp or the relevant regulator en mass, submit more reports than they know what to do with them ? A press campaign along the lines of what would happen to HGV drivers if they ignore their legal limits ?

Surely there is a will to stop this by the guys within FR ?

:bored:

[finncapt]

The original post said

"I have several aquaintances.......who seem to......".

So I met a mate in a pub who knows a bloke ........

No one has been here to say he has done it and it happens/ed to me.

It's all hearsay.

Mods please put a stop to this, it is one of the stupidest threads I've ever seen on pprune.

[Checklist Charlie]

Why the apparent eagerness to shut down the discussion/thread.

Is the truth too close for comfort ?

Smoke, Fire.

CC

[Phileas Fogg]

Look ...

If you read the Ryanair/Brookfield thread in Terms and Endearment you might appreciate that I have a previous insight knowledge.

RYR had/have a 'floating' base type policy whereas one can work out out of, be off duty in, let's say, Stansted one week and appear on duty a few days later, with no positioning duty involved, in Hahn.

Regardless that I have a RYR agency background I also have a crew scheduling background and, in my world, at the point one goes off duty on a Friday afternoon is the same point that one comes on duty on a Monday morning.

Obviously RYR have a concession with the Irish authority so if one has a grievance take it up with the Irish authority, jumpseat travel is a staff concession, the more staff concessions the better, so I don't get that complaint!

[111boy]

" The original post said

"I have several aquaintances.......who seem to......".

So I met a mate in a pub who knows a bloke ........

No one has been here to say he has done it and it happens/ed to me.

It's all hearsay.

Mods please put a stop to this, it is one of the stupidest threads I've ever seen on PPRuNe. "

It's a very valid thread, there are far more stupid threads. I worked for Ryanair and saw this practice almost everyday. It will all have to come to a halt once EASA get their way. There was plenty of talk from management that without this undocumented crew duty there would be no way of crewing their flights.

I'm really surprised at the calls to close the thread down. Why please ?

[T250]

The original post said

"I have several aquaintances.......who seem to......".

So I met a mate in a pub who knows a bloke ........

No one has been here to say he has done it and it happens/ed to me.

It's all hearsay.

Mods please put a stop to this, it is one of the stupidest threads I've ever seen on pprune.

No let's not put a stop to this, just because it is actually an inconvenient truth that some people on here are bringing up into the open issues not only of how FR employees appear to be breaching DfT regulations, but also FTL and potentially tax and airport charges avoidance.

This commuting off duty does happen, and it is the mechanics and mechanisms around how it is allowed/got away with that is the issue here, amongst other things.

It is the case with 2 other UK airlines, one orange and one major charter operator, that whenever their staff are 'commuting' whether on or off duty, they are given a ticket and go through normal pax security and do NOT use their airside ID to gain access. As they have a ticket, they are complying also with airport charges and they are fully documented as using the airport. They have a legitimate reason to be airside as they are ticketed and departing on a specific flight.

The opposite is the case with this FR commuters issue.

1. Using airside IDs when not on duty is a breach of any UK airport's ID pass system and of a number of DfT rules.

2. It seems that the reason to breach the do not use your airside ID when not on duty is so that FR and it's employees can avoid providing proper ticketed boarding passes to their staff as that would mean paying airport taxes and also going through pax security.

3. If Ryanair aircrew are allowed to just do whatever they like when off duty with regards to airside access, then why can't absolutely anyone else with airside IDs. You are not superior even though you may like to think you are, when it comes to compliance with UK airport DfT procedures. After all, you all still have to go through a mandatory security search every single time you go airside, you are not and should not be exempt from any rules that any other airside worker is subject to! :ouch:

[4468]

There was plenty of talk from management that without this undocumented crew duty there would be no way of crewing their flights.
In a nutshell. Thank you!

This is a very dodgy practice, from a certain operator, encouraging it's pilots to blur the lines, and risk their own livelihood in the process. For whose benefit??? Definitely NOT the pilots'!

And who is defending this dodgy practice? Complaining here that it's all being brought to light??? Calling for the thread to be deleted/shut down, in case it rocks the boat?

Not that operator, (AFAWK) but PILOTS! (apparently??)

You couldn't make this stuff up!!!:ugh:

[Wageslave]

Let's look at it from a different perspective, why should an airline NOT facilitate its off duty crew to travel on empty seats if these employees can prove that they travel between their home and their aircraft? It is not as if these companies are handing out freebees, it's the nature of air transport that homes can be hundreds of miles away from base. So why do you object to airlines and regulators who find a way to accommodate commuters?

You miss the point entirely. No reason at all not to facilitate commuting, indeed it would be a particularly crass employer that didn't. But that is not the point being argued. Neither is envy over freebies, it had nothing to do with that either.

It is to do with Ryanair apparently gaining unfair commercial advantage by operating a typical Irish unwritten exemption to their FTL that effectively adds perhaps a day per week to the work they can get out of their crews. No one else has this advantage. It may well be that the company line is they you should declare these commuting days as duty and if you don't then you're not complying with the rules. But that would be a cynical fudge as they know crew can't afford to lose valuable duty days like that and simply won't declare them. That, if it is the case, would be a nice way for the company to weasel out of responsibility having engineered a system they knew damn well would work in a way that suits them. If that surmise is correct it would take only the most cursory audit of duty hours returns against end duty/start next duty locations and ticket sale records to reveal the scale of the scam. Crew go along with it because it is the only way to be/remain employed, and staying employed is the reason so few of the doubtless scores of their employees have followed this thread and not commented. The culture of fear is all-pervasive. Same reason they put up with no union and all the other crap they have to suffer as taxless, holidayless, pensionless, sick-payless self-accommodating nomads who have to pay for their own sim checks.

The rest of us have to abide by the law and buy staff travel tickets for a nominal sum (some get a few freebies) but all of these attract APT as a pax ticket has to. Why should just one have a system that allows them to circumvent this illegally, and to the company's massive commercial advantage?

Aviation is all about adherence to rules and blatant rule-breaking is usually regarded as unhealthy. That is why so many people are so irritated by this business. It is so blatant yet they continue to get away with it, and the IAA ain't gonna do a damn thing about it, of that you can be certain.

[RAT 5]

If all crew were declared employees, as they should be, then much of this blah blah would disappear. Commuting is not positioning. One is at the choice of the pilot the other at the company. If you are correctly given employee status then any positioning away from base would have to be rostered, organised & ticketed. Rules would followed for both duty times & use of ID's.
What the commuters do is another issue entirely. Personally, if you had to choose between various issues to resolve I would recommend that of employee should top the list.

[ICEHOUSES]

Maybe the handling agents should report this clear breach of dft security when they become aware of this abuse of security by FR crew, as surely they know whats going on illegally at the gate.

[Avenger]

Last month I decided on the spur of the moment to get a flight to UK directly after my duty, I was still in uniform with no bags or change of clothes. On arrival at a well known UK airport I was " ushered" to the crew channel, I explained I was just a PAX, they said " its OK Sir" no need to queue.. they were just being helpful and as far as I know this practice has been going on for years, not restricted to FR by a long shot. Now " outbound" UK or any European airport we should use PAX channels if not on duty as they need the obligatory mug shot to match at the gate computer if required when they scan the pass.. Why the OP picked on FR is a mystery and all this FTL stuff is smoke and mirrors to disguise a FR bash that's clearly not working and of little interest to " fellow pilots"

[111boy]

Simply being ushered through crew arrivals, so What ? Being called Sir, now that's worthy of a mention, I would place money on the airport being somewhere other that Stn. But if you think 10 pages in a week ( 25 000 views )is not of interest to the pilot community then I would have to ask why you don't go on all of the many other threads with fewer interest and declare that no one cares about them either ?

I think you might have missed the point, sorry.

[LlamaFarmer]

Haven't we?! :confused:

Commuting or positioning - it doesn't matter what you call it - is done because the employer requires you to do it. It's for the job. It's at their behest. It's not done for fun.

But it's not...

Commuting is travelling from your chosen home to your normal base. It is required to do your normal job, and is reasonable to require you to do it, but is not part of your job.

Positioning to somewhere other than your normal base is not commuting, it is relocating for the companies benefit. Therefore part of the job.

[xollob]

Avenger


Why the OP picked on FR is a mystery and all this FTL stuff is smoke and mirrors to disguise a FR bash that's clearly not working and of little interest to " fellow pilots" I work for another airline and find this blatant abuse of FTL's very relevant, any pilot from any airline should also find it concerning. It's not an FR bash, but a topic that is being discussed about a common practise within FR. It wouldn't happen in the outfit I or other colleagues work for because their TU would be all over that and simply pilots wouldn't operate it if its not legal, safe in the knowledge they are protecting their licences and free from persecution.


This may well be a wide spread practise (positioning on rest days - not commuting and it not being recorded as duty period) in other airlines, that would be equally as bad, if you know of other airlines who do this also please share, only one I know of is FR. This will become if it isn't already an issue under EASA as it clearly states a pilot can only have one home base, so some of the sharp practise that certain other European operators used to do in the same way may not be undertaken (times in taxis counting as rest periods etc).


Why do I find it all very relevant, well because all of our employers seem to have an aspiration to strive to the lowest common denominator, if an outfit is getting away with something that is saving them money you can bet any other employer must be thinking "would be good if we could do that" and then T&C's come under attack. I liken it to a rampant disease that starts in your little toe can spread very quickly to other parts of the body unless you amputate it or get some very strong medication.


Perhaps you can explain why you believe pilots being required to undertake positioning duties in their rest periods/days off is smoke and mirrors and not a breach of FTL's please ?

[Say Mach Number]

Perhaps you can explain why you believe pilots being required to undertake positioning duties in their rest periods/days off is smoke and mirrors and not a breach of FTL's please ?

They are not 'required' people choose to accept a lifestyle to live where the planes are not and therefore do it by choice.

I live near the airport I fly from but I could equally live in another country. As long as I get to my base for my flight wether by air, sea or land is irrelevant.

The point that your missing is that if I travel by FR to work I am not a pax but recorded as crew! Hence on duty in theory.

Buy a ticket and the issue goes away!!

Thats the issue none wants to spend out and 'buy' a ticket to get to work because working for FR is sold on a free commute if you cant be based at home.

And FR sure as hell don't want you to count the hours of your commute.

[Avenger]

The OP questioned the basic mechanics of how this system of free tickets on FR can work with the "assumption" that the positioning pilot was " additional or Sn " crew.. then muddied with briefings etc etc .. later the OP asked about the aspect of FTLs.
The thread has largely ignored the first point that FR crews, along with many others, can get free staff travel and just turn up at the gate, maybe the difference is that the FR crews don't get a ticket but I am sure they are LMC on the load sheet.. other airlines issue a blank boarding pass..
As pointed out, if you self position for your own needs it is not duty and the company doesn't give fig, neither do the authorities... on the other hand if the question is, is it sensible before a duty to position across Europe, and are you rested enough.. that's another topic and one that was well ventilated about BA long haul crews living abroad. Personally, I can get more rest tucked away in the aircraft with headphones under a blanket than I can get trundling around the M25 and can arrive " rested" .
Dont a fair chunk of NLH live abroad? Along with many others on commute contracts ? or are we now saying Joe Bloggs is going to position across Europe after and before each duty? The reason I say fellow pilots are " not interested" is not the topic but the implication that once again, a small benefit of the job may be eroded by some red tape rubber stamp Jonny in whitehall.
IF the company ask you to position on an " OFF DAY" it is no longer an off day and is duty.. full stop.. positioning AFTER a duty is usually not duty if it can be accomplished within the normal FDP. It only effects rest required.
So in the Nutshell, pilots that choose to live away from base for their own lifestyle needs and take advantage of free travel or un-ticketed travel do so under their own responsibility, how can we possibly hold airlines to account for this?
As for airports allowing access through crew channels, this is up to the guy on the gate at the time, yes he/she may be breaking the rules by doing a favour..
Lastly, I bet my bottom dollar that we have all at some time had the call " I know you are off...but can you do us a favour... etc etc" the cloth cuts both ways

[111boy]

But I thought you thought it was a bit too tedious ? The point you have noted simply do not address the issue, luckily EASA have not, come late Feb the " hard rules " kick in, the " soft rules " will also implicate Ryan.

Perhaps read the thread, if you can be bothered? It's pretty tedious, and not remotely what you are on about. The law has been broken. Defend that perhaps ?

But wrong, wrong, misinformed and wrong, was better before you were interested, but you aren't? And it isn't?

So ?

[llondel]

For those resident in the UK (and possibly elsewhere), isn't there a tax implication? I'm sure that if my employer provided free air travel, or even gave me a free bus pass to commute from home to my normal place of work, the Inland Revenue would be in touch to get their share of a taxable benefit. On the other side of that, if my local airport was designated my normal place of work and I drove there at my own expense before my employer flew me elsewhere, that would be tax free but for flight crew it would fall foul of the FTL rules.

[MichaelOLearyGenius]

Why do I find it all very relevant, well because all of our employers seem to have an aspiration to strive to the lowest common denominator, if an outfit is getting away with something that is saving them money you can bet any other employer must be thinking "would be good if we could do that" and then T&C's come under attack. I liken it to a rampant disease that starts in your little toe can spread very quickly to other parts of the body unless you amputate it or get some very strong medication.


Yes and it gives FR an unfair competitive advantage. If they are positioning as crew they should be getting paid for their time. If they're commuting they should have to pay for their ticket.

Neither of these practices is occurring.

[golfyankeesierra]

What is bothering you all? Jumpseating is common practice in aviation. In Europe we copied it from the other side of the pond. Where they probably have the same issues with airside passes, security and an IRS.
I applaud any initiative to stop unfair benefits for the company RYR, but this is not exclusively for RYR, it is for many pilots of many airlines all over Europe, and it works fine!

:*

[captplaystation]

They used to have a wonderful system in Spain,where, like the system (pre 9/11 I guess ) in the USA, you showed your badge & were accommodated.

It still exists, but the companies have been forced by "Aunty EASA" (or maybe the Dept of Transport equivalent in Spain ) to try to interfere in cockpit jump seat occupation. . . . . feckin crazy, I bet if someone had been sitting on the jump seat of the Spanair Mad Dog in MAD back in 2008 it wouldn't have ended the way it did . . . . always astonished how many errors I spot from the jump seat, no pressure, no role to play . . . easy-peasy.


Anyway, drifting from the thread subject, back to stirring the brown stuff you bunch of happy campers (or did I misspell that last word :hmm: )

[172_driver]

Perhaps you can explain why you believe pilots being required to undertake positioning duties in their rest periods/days off is smoke and mirrors and not a breach of FTL's please ?

They are not 'required' people choose to accept a lifestyle to live where the planes are not and therefore do it by choice.
Say Mach Number,


That is true only for those who choose to commute from home to assigned base. When you are sent to another base than your assigned base you are traveling there at the behest of the operator, on your OFF day, no duty time/min rest recorded. If you are in Ryanair, you know that's happening all the time!!!

The point that your missing is that if I travel by FR to work I am not a pax but recorded as crew! Hence on duty in theory.

I don't buy that. I've done hundreds of commutes in FR. Never once have these commutes been recorded on the Voyage report as crew. There has been no trail in my Duty Plan. My roster says OFF, except for the rostered deadheading to recurrent training. The only little trail is my crewcode on the loadsheet, but that's hardly proof of me being on duty.

[victorc10]

It is counted as duty time, NOT flight duty time (as per the operations manual) and therefore you are on duty but not likely to affect your FTL's. Details are recorded and have been for a number of years, previously not. The new regulations will require some changes and are currently being negotiated with IAA.

[LlamaFarmer]

It is counted as duty time, NOT flight duty time (as per the operations manual) and therefore you are on duty but not likely to affect your FTL's. Details are recorded and have been for a number of years, previously not. The new regulations will require some changes and are currently being negotiated with IAA.

But surely it will because it affects the local time you went ON duty.

[Rananim]

Fact:PILOTS COMMUTE
Best way:Ticketed(ID00) normal channels,sits in Business,free champagne no uniform
Option 1:Ticketed(ID00) normal channels,sits in Business,no champagne in uniform
Option 2:Crew ID on Gen Dec,crew channels,sits in Business no champs
Option 3:Crew ID on Gen Dec,crew channels,j/s ride
Option 4:Crew ID no Gen Dec,crew channels,(used pre 911,still used except some places)
Option 5:Crew ID at gate in transit,ask operating skipper direct-works domestic
Option 6:Crew ID at Flt OPS of another carrier and ask crew for j/s-works well in Asia
The impossible option(so it would seem):try to commute from or to any UK airport without a passenger ticket.
I note i)an OPERATING crew member arriving at LHR,for example,can not enter the departure shopping area during a turnaround without first exiting through arrivals and then re-entering through normal departure channels.Pilots like to shop.Its one of the perks.Its done the world over except...where the lunatics run the asylum.
i)An operating crew member on a turnaround at a UK airport can and sometimes is literally prevented from performing a walkaround due jetway sec code access.And when access is given(they wont give code)you cant get back in!NUTS.

Fortunately,I dont commute via EU much.But if I had to,I would avoid the UK.

[viking767]

This discussion sure makes me appreciate the KCM system in use in the US.

[Avenger]

Sorry 111 what exactly is your point? I was under the impression this was a discussion forum yet your focus seems to be a crusade for EASA FTLs and tighter movements of crew..how precisely is this in the interests of self positioning crew wanting a life style choice.. maybe you missed the point!

[Avenger]

Incidentally could you please provide a ref for the soft rules and hard rules comment I can't find this, thanks

[victorc10]

Question.

Which is the legal document?

A) Published roster
B) Operations manual

[Kirks gusset]

Any topic starting with Ryanair always gets a good hit rate it is not a reflection of the quality more the inverse relationship between quality and volume. Perhaps the thread could be re titled to cover the broader concept ? At THY if you want to self position you need a ticket it's not duty. If I'm required to position to another base for a flight by the company its duty not flight duty and the time recorded according to time spent.

[111boy]

At the moment we have " implementation rules " the intention being that they can be changed, by operators. For example from CAA.co.uk, EASA FTL.

" Variations

Within the new regulations there are two standard variations that an operator may apply for:

Two pilot flight duty period limits when un-acclimatised
Reduced rest provisions
These both require an increased level of risk assessment and full Fatigue Risk Management (FRM) approval. Unless an operator already holds an FRM approval, they will not be granted one with their initial EASA Subpart FTL scheme and therefore will not initially be able to use these variations. "

So what I mean is that some rules are set hard, others not. Whilst Easy for instance have a FRM program, to my knowledge Ryan, do not. For years now they have been telling pilots that they can't be tired because some guy they said was ex NASA, said that their roster was " grand " . Just an example of the 2 operating approaches.

I don't want to restrict any pilots lifestyle choice, I would like to see the end of abuse of regulation, to prevent another Buffalo accident

[PENKO]

We have shown time and time again in this thread that commuting in uniform is an approved way of travel. Sure, you might think that there are some grey areas and issues but it is obvious that these issues have been resolved with the authorities otherwise a lot of crew would have their passes revoked in the last two hours alone! So please all stop making a fool of yourselves by shouting that security will pull passes etc.

Targeting commuting to prevent a 'Buffalo'? By making life impossible for thousands of pilots (of ALL airlines!) who commute responsibly? Whilst it is time and agaoin shown that rules are not being abused? That's a bit over the top don't you think?

Unfair competition? Any airline can apply the rules to facilitate their crew to commute. So no unfair competition.

[PENKO]

For those resident in the UK (and possibly elsewhere), isn't there a tax implication? I'm sure that if my employer provided free air travel, or even gave me a free bus pass to commute from home to my normal place of work, the Inland Revenue would be in touch to get their share of a taxable benefit. On the other side of that, if my local airport was designated my normal place of work and I drove there at my own expense before my employer flew me elsewhere, that would be tax free but for flight crew it would fall foul of the FTL rules.

Or there is sensible arrangement with the authorities that cater for the special circumstances involving airlines, airplanes, pilots, ships, crew, 1000 km commutes, etc. Like there are many many many sensible arrangements with the authorities in every other sector.

[wiggy]

We have shown time and time again in this thread that commuting in uniform is an approved way of travel.

I think we all know that both commuting and positioning/deadheading in uniform is Ok on many airlines ( actually a requirement into/out of some countries)..so no argument there..

Sure, you might hink (sic) that there are some grey areas and issues but it is obvious that these issues have been resolved with the authorities otherwise a lot of crew would have their passes revoked in the last two hours alone!

OK, but health warning still applies. It seems certain airlines have an arrangements in place certain airports ( and chapeau to those who organised it if the arrangements allow free travel and/or makes life easier), but it would be dangerous to assume that the likes of using Staff lanes and ID for positioning/commuting is a given right for all airlines in Europe at all airports in Europe, because it very much most definitely isn't...in many places the local regs are not "grey" at all.

[PENKO]

That goes without saying wiggy. But that does not mean that arrangements cannot be made. :ok:

[BBK]

I think the OP was, IMHO, just pooh stirring and indulging in RYR bashing. I'm no fan of some of their business practices as it relates to the working conditions of professional pilots but I've flown with enough ex RYR guys to know it's not all bad either.

The issue of positioning/commuting is, I suspect, a grey area in RYR. However, I realise that a lot of commuters at RYR are probably doing so out of necessity. They are not commuters through choice as you might find at BA and VS for example. If the company has a way of allowing that that makes it easier for them then who am I, or anyone else, to criticise.

The posts I've found really annoying are the ones about airside access ie. the "having an airport ID does not confer access etc" brigade. :ugh:

The use of an ID, in this context, if it is allowed by the airport/DfT is just a means to avoid the potentially longer queues in the public screening areas. The end result will be the same as the commuting (positioning) pilot will end up airside at the gate. Of course if he/she used their ID to access the airport when not traveling they would, quite rightly, lose their ID if caught. Also, bear in mind that whichever way you get airside the process is the same in terms of screening.

In fact a few years ago BALPA agreed a protocol with the DfT that commuting and positioning crews could use the staff search areas subject to certain caveats. From memory I believe that one could only do so within 24 hours of a duty and if requested would need to show your roster if asked to do so. However, when I tried to do so I got a "sorry mate, we ain't heard about this". At the time I emailed the AVSEC chap at BALPA and he said this airport had signed up to the agreement.

Anyway, just my two penn'orth.

BBK

[FlightDetent]

Perhaps the Schengen border rules have something to do with it, where arrangements certainly cannot be made.

[hunterboy]

Having witnessed several times the arrest of commuting pilots who thought that the rules didn't apply to them, I think any pilot that isn't 100% aware of immigration/emigration rules as well as local security procedures is leaving themselves wide open to a world of hurt. At LGW/LHR, for instance, the removal of air-side passes has been threatened, which I assume would lead to dismissal. I can't imagine that within the UK (with its rabid adherence to rules and regs) it would be any different at another airport.
We have had several incidents related to "flight deck breaches" where the "breacher" is a employee/crewmember/pilot, but the correct procedures or paperwork hadn't been followed. In one case, the CAA were looking at prosecution.
In Spain, I saw one pilot arrested by the Guardia Civil, for swiping when not actually on duty. Just because you've got away with it doesn't necessarily mean it is legal. Just be careful out there.....

[PENKO]

In fact a few years ago BALPA agreed a protocol with the DfT that commuting and positioning crews could use the staff search areas subject to certain caveats. From memory I believe that one could only do so within 24 hours of a duty and if requested would need to show your roster if asked to do so. However, when I tried to do so I got a "sorry mate, we ain't heard about this". At the time I emailed the AVSEC chap at BALPA and he said this airport had signed up to the agreement.

Thank you BBK for your insightful post. Especially re the arrangement with BALPA.


hunterboy, commuters will be well aware of all the rules regarding commuting in uniform as laid down in their company manuals. There really is no need for you to remind them that misuse of airline ID can get them in trouble, let alone arrested or suspended. Do you remind your doctor to wash his hands after you?

[111boy]

A well argued point, clearly and succinctly put. Can't believe we were discussing it really. So all settled then, thanks. You taught us all a lesson.

May as well close the thread now as you have proved everything " over and over again " so impressed

[Checklist Charlie]

Took long enough to remember these apparent answers.

I'm glad I'm not required to make such 'donations' of time and effort to my employer. I am also thankful that they have enough staff and good sense to employ sufficient crew without expecting us to make these donations to subsidise the company.

Continue to enjoy your little heap.

CC

[bbrown1664]

There are two distinct items being discussed here. And this is my opinion.

First, positioning flights. These are where your employer is sending you from airport 1 to airport 2 so you can then be crew from airport 2. This is considered work and counts towards whatever hours, charges etc you have. You should be listed on the manifest as crew or a passenger for this. If as crew, then crew routes are open to you. If as a passenger, you should have a ticket and boarding card and use the passenger routes regardless of the fact that you may have a security pass for airport A.

Second is commuting. This is where you choose to live near airport A but are based at airport B and it is your responsibility to get to airport B. In this case, this is not work and you should always be on the manifest as a passenger with a ticket/boarding card. You should ALWAYS use the passenger routes in this instance.

[Pizza Express]

Could someone please explain the "tax paid sector cheque" ?

[Airbubba]

This entire topic makes me very happy to be a pilot in the U.S.A.

This should not be this complicated.

Stuff like this is why we left.....

This discussion sure makes me appreciate the KCM system in use in the US.

Yep, it seems like some folks stay up nights thinking of rules and excuses not to do something. We do have it good with jumpseats in the U.S.

At bases like EWR, LGA and JFK well over half of the pilots commute more than 100 miles to go to work. 9-11 raised the bar as far as authentication but we do enjoy reciprocal free rides on most U.S. carriers including cargo airlines. :ok:

[FLCH]

And we get free parking at the airport while on vacation !

[stator vane]

FLCH!

You muchee bad boy!

How you sleep at night??

Ha!

[RAT 5]

There are a couple of questions: legality & convenience, plus, perhaps, integrity and respect both of employer & employee.

According to EASA FTL's the operator & crew member is responsible to abide by the FTL regulations and to keep a record of their duties for 24 months. The operator will assign each crew member a home base; note it does not say employee, but crew member. If the operator requires the crew member to report for duty away from home base then it is classified as positioning, and as such is duty at the very least. If a positioning crew member is listed as crew then it is FDP.
The maximum duty is 60hrs in 7 consecutive days. Here is a simple question for those involved.
A crew member (let's say contractor) is home based at A. They are rostered to report for duty at B which is outside driving distance and requires air travel. During their 5 day duty they will accumulate 50 hours FDP. To position A-B requires 1 or 2 sectors of company a/c travel and a total >6 hours. It is rostered as Day Off. Then follows 5 flying days. Travel home B-A >6 hours is the next day. It is rostered s Day Off.
Do pilots consider this to be 7 days consecutive duty and > 60hours? If they are rostered in such a way what is their reaction? Or do they have a different opinion? Or are their travelling days now rostered as duty days? Pray tell.

[172_driver]

The maximum duty is 60hrs in 7 consecutive days. Here is a simple question for those involved.
A crew member (let's say contractor) is home based at A. They are rostered to report for duty at B which is outside driving distance and requires air travel. During their 5 day duty they will accumulate 50 hours FDP. To position A-B requires 1 or 2 sectors of company a/c travel and a total >6 hours. It is rostered as Day Off. Then follows 5 flying days. Travel home B-A >6 hours is the next day. It is rostered s Day Off.
Do pilots consider this to be 7 days consecutive duty and > 60hours? If they are rostered in such a way what is their reaction? Or do they have a different opinion? Or are their travelling days now rostered as duty days? Pray tell.

My experience is people just got on with it and did it. Been there, done that. And as I have mentioned before, there was no duty time recorded nor any check that I got my minimum rest.

victorc10 wrote in this matter: It is counted as duty time, NOT flight duty time (as per the operations manual) and therefore you are on duty but not likely to affect your FTL's. Details are recorded and have been for a number of years, previously not. The new regulations will require some changes and are currently being negotiated with IAA.

I don't believe that for a second. My duty record still have me recorded as OFF on all those traveling days. As this is long gone for me know, I can honestly say I've probably busted the minimum rest on several occasions. Well I know I have, to avoid having to travel a day earlier losing yet another OFF day. So if details are recorded why have I not heard anything about it?
If this poster is a Ryanair employee, then he might be correct. I think on the rare occasions they are sent out of base it's put on the roster as a deadheading flight. For contractors, no.

[sky9]

It makes a mockery of Flight Time Limitations and the alleviation of fatigue.
In a proper airline monitored by a proper Aviation Authority this just wouldn't happen.
A pilot has a designated base and any travel away from that base is recorded as a duty period.

"Disney" airlines sums it up.

[level_change]

When Ryanair moved its entire operation from BGY to MXP in 2014 temporarily due to madatory runway works - all pilots and cabin crew got a memo officially changing their base to MXP to avoid any contractual obligation to provide accomodation or out of base allowances.

After letters and complaints some rooms were provided for a part of the crew. Not sure but i think you even should have had a room partner and needed to register for it long in advance (lucky for some maybe :})

Most crew however chose to use a company provided bus at 3:30 AM that would leave at the BGY crewroom before the early shift or around 10:30 AM on lates to operate a full roster out of MXP. (The bus each way depending on the traffic jams near milan took around 1,5h . )

Offical duty time started at EOBT minus 45 in the crewroom at MXP and ended with time on blocks.

Ryanair at the same time kept saying that its up to the individual to turn up at base well rested. :ugh:

Most pilots took hotels at their own cost and we were all concerned about fatigue levels of our cabin crew, which was under extreme pressure. I personally witnessed when *actual* (depending on how you want to define it) duty times were exceeded for days in a row and some captains were not happy to fly with some of the crew due to fatigue.
Besides internal critique I filed two confidential reports with the IAA on this matter and the response was this;

Thank you for your communication regarding Ryanair’s plan to open a temporary Base in Malpensa while necessary works are being carried out in Bergamo. The Authority has reviewed Ryanair’s proposal and can confirm that they comply with the requirements of EU-OPS. The Authority would wish to point out that it does not have oversight responsibility for contractual issues.Just so you see how much the real world cares about your commuting - it happens to be possible cause it puts flexibility to Ryanairs planning and under Ry(IAA) their flexibilty is well protected by their associated authority.

Since we all now know that it was legal and there were no incidents / accidents during the period , it must follow that everything was safe!

:ok: win win for all relevant parties (where the word relevant does certainly not apply to crew)

[111boy]

Great post, great insight, I really hope this serves to illustrate the sort of issues that Ryanair pilots face and the total lack of regulation from the muppets ( IAA ) . Seriously, great thanks, really illustrates the attitude

[pax2908]

Perhaps it will be worth in the future raising the issue with more than one Authority; perhaps Publish the outcome, and some Customers may decide where it may not be safe to fly?

[LlamaFarmer]

Agreed, if a similar issue occurs, it would do no harm to forward such reports to any and all aviation authorities in EASA where RYR operate, who may be able to pressure IAA.

[Twiglet1]

Level change
So FR did comply with the regulations but didn't give a toss about staff welfare - its all about the wonga to them. I think they had a similar situ in Brindisi ? when they changed crew base overnight due to the situ in Libya ?

[RAT 5]

It would be interesting to audit the % income of IAA from RYR. With >3000 pilots and increasing and the mandatory IAA licence required; with >330 a/c on Irish register and increasing; with what ever engineering licences under IAA regime; with EASA cabin crew licences being required and presumably IAA issued; with all other company regulations under IAA jurisdiction I wonder how much goes into the IAA coffers from RYR.
Note I asked %. UK CAA receives a huge amount from BA, but perhaps the % of total is not too great.
Not casting any aspersions, just curious.

[4468]

Many other BIG carriers throughout the EU an beyond, carry EI- registrations! I often wonder why?

[RAT 5]

Flag of convenience. I always thought EI was for Liberia.

[flyingmed]

Many other BIG carriers throughout the EU an beyond, carry EI- registrations! I often wonder why?

Off topic. And most of these EI registered aircraft are leased from leasing companies based in Ireland. Alitalia among others operate EI reg! :ugh: are we going to question Alitalias commuting also or any other people who use EI registered aircraft to get to work?

[Wageslave]

If it looks corrupt and smells corrupt then who knows what they might find ???[/B]

"Probably" numbers of ex Irish Air Corps buddies in many if not most positions of influence with respect to aircraft ops and compliance in both organisations. A nice cosy little old-boys-club cabal that is in none of their interests to see stirred up.

Trouble is, who is going to go looking? The Irish Government? Not bloody likely for much the same sort of reason. Nor any European "regulatory body" either - is there one with the "authority" to do that?

[Jwscud]

Regarding the IAA, it is worth noting that they recently upped the fee for ATPL issue to €600. Ryanair provide them with a captive audience of pilots. 600 cadets a year gives them €360k/year in ATPL upgrades. Add in licence conversions, type rating fees &DC and it's a nice little earner.

Worth noting that even the gold plated CAA only charge £240 (around €330) for the same service.

[ManaAdaSystem]

A small sidestep:
Are we talking jump seats in the cabin, or do they use the cockpit seats as well?
I am stricktly forbidden to carry anybody in the cockpit, who are not on duty, on flights to, from or over UK.
Doing so can put me (and my company) in serious trouble with the UK authorities.

[172_driver]

Are we talking jump seats in the cabin, or do they use the cockpit seats as well?

Both, depending where there is space available. Or if you've got a buddy up front who you'd like to catch up with.

[zerotohero]

RAT 5

I remember this been mentioned a few years ago about revenue to them from Ryanair and it was about 0.5% of there budget or something. The main bulk is from airways charges.

This is all just guess work at this point with no real facts from me.

[INKJET]

Reading this thread it seems there is some confusion over the use of the word positioning.

If you are based in Bergamo but live in Luton then traveling to work is just that, it is not positioning, your not on duty,its not duty and you should be on board your employers aircraft (contractor or directly employed) as a ticketed passenger, that may be standby or firm.

What you cannot do in the UK is to turn up on a day off and use your airside pass to gain access to airside to turn up at the gate and ask the gate staff to put you on the flight, this would be in breech of the conditions of your airside pass. I do not doubt that this is going on, but that doesn't make it legal or right.

At Norwegian, also an Irish registered airline many pilots face the same situation of living in one country and working in another, Norwegian's solution is much simpler and transparent, all flight deck and some approved cabin crew can text their staff code and the flight on which they wish to travel and an automated system responds within about 10 seconds with a booking reference (called an S2 ticket) you then check in the same as any normal passenger, again this is not duty travel, you are not on duty and yes some use this then operate, but thats no different to catching the train to work and certainly less stressful than driving, you are allowed to occupy jumps seats both cabin and flight deck if the cabin is full. My understanding is that because this is NOT a leisure ticket and is to be used only for self positioning BEFORE OR AFTER DUTY then it does not attract APD

From time to time we also have to work from other than our home base, this is at the behest of the company and counts in full as duty time and must comply with FTL, the company rosters the positioning flight with a firm ticket,provides HOTAC, and all ground transport to from the hotel, the report time is STD - 1hour and counts in full as duty time, minimum rest normally 12 hours can be reduced to 10 hours in a hotel

So if people are turning up at the gate on days off having got there without a ticket by using staff ID channels, then i would suggest that they are in breech of many rules governing the issuance of airside passes, what they are doing is a crime and punishable as such.

Of course some will say its the last perk we have!! i disagree its black and white, it may allow people to have some sort of life whilst working in one country and living in another, but that does not make it right and your employer is complicit in allowing this practice to continue, clearly there are simple alternatives to achieve the same end as demonstrated by the Norwegian S2 ticket system, this keeps everyone legal and once set up the cost to the employer is close to zero.

[Bobermo]

@Inkjet, do you pax tax on these tickets?

[ManaAdaSystem]

We have been told we can't put anybody on the cockpit jump seats except persons on duty (assosiated with the operation of the aircraft) when we fly in UK airspace.
That pretty much limits the use of the seats to CAA inspectors, checkers and supernumary crew on familiarization flights.
Crew positioning can't be carried in the cockpit. We have been told that.
We have also been told if we break these rules, we risk loosing access to airside, and my company risk loosing the right to operate in UK airspace.

But Ryanair can use cockpit seats as pax seats for pilots traveling to and from work, and I see nothing stopping pilots from putting on the uniform and getting a free ride going on holiday.

The whole system in UK is a joke.

[wiggy]

The whole system in UK is a joke.

Mana

For hopefully obvious reasons I can't go into specifics but I'm not sure you can blame the rule set you are working to completely on the UK authorities.


And FWIW I get fleeced every time I commute by air on my own employers aircraft, so like Bobermo I'm tad curious about APD......