Virgin Blue Reduced Cabin Crew Compliment
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 320subria
What has the feedback been like
If you ask anyone involved in dispatching/operating or even passengering on an -800 now, the feedback will most likely be
or 
or 
Ask the beancounters, it will most likey be
or 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh well will get to find out for myself in the next few days. It seems to be a trend at the moment, Jetblue in the States announced in December that it was removing a row of seats on their A320's to seat 150 pax (thats a lot of legroom for a low cost carrier, if only our guests got that kind of legroom!) and therefore reducing crew to 3. They estimate a saving of US$30million over 5 years, so I am guessing it must be saving DJ $AUD8-10 million over 5 years.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did a very rough calculation of savings of at least $3.5 million a year - that was based on I think 25 -800's flying 16 hours a day over 365 days a year, paying CC I think $23 an hour - not including the superannuation payments that would have been made on those wages too.
Did several sectors yesterday on the 800 with only 4 cabin crew, worked quite well with no problems reported!!! Don't forget the US and Europe have been operating this way for a hell of a long time with no real issues what so ever.
Don't forget the US and Europe have been operating this way for a hell of a long time with no real issues what so ever.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets not also forget that we are Not the US or Europe and we should be trying to protect the conditions we have here, not happily giving them away...
Aussie: DJ operate 4 crew on the -700, and recently obtained a CASA Exemption to operate the -800 with 4 crew instead of the 5 that would be required under the standard 1:36 ratio (the -800s can carry 180 pax).
Aussie: DJ operate 4 crew on the -700, and recently obtained a CASA Exemption to operate the -800 with 4 crew instead of the 5 that would be required under the standard 1:36 ratio (the -800s can carry 180 pax).
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: NZ
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought the ICAO ratio was 1:50....at least that is what it is in NZ. Air NZ reduced the seating capacity on the Freedom A320s so as to allow 3 F/As, and Air NZ operate some flights (eg BNE flights) without Business Class and with 3 F/A. Think Business Class means an "extra compartment" so the 4th crew member is req'd.
Carrying 3 is probably ok for shorter sectors on domestic ops, but can cause a complete shambles on an international flight if someone gets sick or injured, resulting in a stranded flight, away from a crew base. Bang go all the savings with the associated disrupt costs........but it seemed like such a good idea
Carrying 3 is probably ok for shorter sectors on domestic ops, but can cause a complete shambles on an international flight if someone gets sick or injured, resulting in a stranded flight, away from a crew base. Bang go all the savings with the associated disrupt costs........but it seemed like such a good idea
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How times have changed.
One of the most disgusting things I have ever seen in Aviation, was back in the days when Ansett operated B767s.
A B767 with a full load of pax was due to depart BNE for SYD when they realised they were one flight attendant short, and couldn't get a replacement. Ten were rostered but the legal requirement was only eight, so the Captain elected to go okay with nine.
The flight attendants refused to crew the flight with nine, even though it was quite legal, and refused pleas to take just 90% of the pax with 90% of the normal flight attendants, and even later pleas to take as little as 50% of the pax with nine flight attendants, and in the end the B767 departed for SYD as a ferry flight, with the nine flight attendants on board and NO pax, leaving stranded some 200 very irate pax.
One of the most disgusting things I have ever seen in Aviation, was back in the days when Ansett operated B767s.
A B767 with a full load of pax was due to depart BNE for SYD when they realised they were one flight attendant short, and couldn't get a replacement. Ten were rostered but the legal requirement was only eight, so the Captain elected to go okay with nine.
The flight attendants refused to crew the flight with nine, even though it was quite legal, and refused pleas to take just 90% of the pax with 90% of the normal flight attendants, and even later pleas to take as little as 50% of the pax with nine flight attendants, and in the end the B767 departed for SYD as a ferry flight, with the nine flight attendants on board and NO pax, leaving stranded some 200 very irate pax.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 77
Posts: 1,406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gee, and thought this thread was going to be about how DJ staff are now saying things like "lookin' good" instead of "how are you, you're looking well today sir", or some such.... in the interests of faster boarding, time saving, cost savings, etc.... 
