Here is the literary gem ,
judge for yourself.




No: 009/08
Date: 25/1/08
FLIGHT STANDING ORDER OPERATIONS Cancels: NIL
FSO Applicability: All Aircraft Page 1
ALL AIRCRAFT
MINIMUM OPERATING CABIN CREW
Background:
The Cabin Crew (Cabin Attendant) complement may be varied due to an unplanned Cabin Crew shortfall (eg. upline sickness). As a minimum, there must be at least one Cabin Attendant for each unit of 36 passengers, with not less than one Cabin Attendant for each floor level exit in any cabin with two aisles.
In the majority of circumstances, Cabin Crew shortfalls will be managed in accordance with FAM 18.2.2 ‘Minimum Operating Cabin Crew’. This will involve operating the service with a reduced passenger load. CASA have indicated that under exceptional circumstances, Flight Crew may form part of the Cabin Crew complement, as Flight Crew are qualified in the execution of evacuation procedures.
Currently there is no documented procedure in place for Flight Crew to form part of the Cabin Crew complement. The following policy will be included in the next revision of the FAM.
Policy:
• The minimum number of Cabin Crew outlined in FAM18.2.2 is only to be applied at ports where no additional Cabin Crew are available. A minimum of one crew member must operate in each Primary position.
• In exceptional circumstances, relief Flight Crew members may form part of the Cabin Crew complement during takeoff and landing. This may prevent having to operate the service with a reduced passenger load.
• Prior to this occurring, the Operating Captain must contact the IOC. A decision will then be made in consultation with the Duty Captain, Cabin Crew management and CASA.
• If approved, the relief Flight Crew member shall request a briefing from the CSM on Door Primary responsibilities and duties.
• An adjustment to the cabin service may be necessary.




I wonder what the CASA indication was?
Didn't actually object when some hypothetical bullsh!te situation was casually mentioned over a boozy lunch?

LHR bases theory
 

After 3 years of watching many SO's spending their whole break time in the cabin and galley trying to "tune" a young LHR loverly for a slip port bedroom rumble.

Management thought they save you some rest time and put you straight into the action.

" After 3 years of watching many SO's spending their whole break time in the cabin and galley trying to "tune" a young LHR loverly for a slip port bedroom rumble.

Management thought they save you some rest time and put you straight into the action."

Thats gotta be one of the best posts about this subject! :D

Your not management are ya dood? For sure to be soon though with ideas like that, well done that man:ok:

consultation is a wonderful thing - esp on the Friday before a long weekend!

I would not imagine for a minute that this would sit comfortably with any crew regardless of status (unless of course you're doing a evac out of Afganistan on Christmas Eve...is that what they meant by 'exceptional'!!!!!)


I can just see a keen 20 year old SO head to head with one of the old girls regarding who is in command in the cabin ...could be a whole new meaning to CRM

Seems to be a common topic in this thread but to be honest I don't think there would be any conflict at all.There must be some fragile ego's around.

But it reminds me of a joke.

What is the last thing a pilot does before boarding a raft after a ditching?

Takes off his/her epaulets:E

well i think
 

its a gigantic joke. where is the faaa on this subject. they should consult with AIPA and knock that one straight back. we know the Qf subsidery in canberra, formerly known as CASA is becoming more and more a massive joke.
time for the new minister to take the broom and clean out. amazes me that commercial consideration are more important to casa then anything to do with safety.

:confused: Why would he/she do that?

Here is the reply of the emperor..

Thank you to those members who have brought to my attention concerns that the cabin crew complement may be varied due to unplanned exceptional circumstances to include pilots. Since being made aware of the situation I have spoken to the Chief Pilot and the FAAA Divisional Secretary and I am assured that the FSO was only written because the decision to utilise the third flight crew member to cover the absence of a flight attendant occurred without the necessary approval. There is no desire to make this a common practice.

Nevertheless, prima facie neither AIPA nor the FAAA International Division have any unresolvable difficulty with S/Os being used to meet minimum cabin crew numbers in unforeseen and/or unusual exceptional circumstances - provided the required approvals and agreements are in place. I have written to all concerned to discuss, and if thought fit, will ultimately agree the necessary Memorandum of Agreement. However, until you are formally advised by AIPA that all is in order, I strongly recommend that no member make up the shortfall in the number of cabin crew required without first obtaining the consent of both Qantas and AIPA.


I suspect this guy is busy playing the same fiddle as Dixon whilst the empire burns.
As I understand it NO consultation took place with the COM..
He is PRIMA FACIE behaving like a PRIMA DONA.


And for the record am not a member of the Com..

Touche,Eclan.But if you guys can send down a similar under thirty well built female s/o we would appreciate it.

As I said before I agree with you about any cabin leadership conflict that some suggest might happen.

So if the s/o wants to do the pa's,handle upgrade request,deal with ife and seat problems or in a lousy situation carry out a full evac then I am more than happy to let them do it.

Especially as it is obviously a bludge as you so eloquently put it.

QFinsider,
I agree with you because how many times has this company come up with their own interpretation of an issue.If someone in both unions believe that on face value the company has no further plans to make the most out of this FSO then I guess a few people have not learnt from history.

FSO withdrawn
 

I hear it's game over for this FSO
well done to the FAAA & APIA reps who scrummed down

If the FSO has been cancelled ,the Genius working in the office who thought it up should get a swift kick up the behind:ok:

I think the demise of the FSO is premature.

I sincerely hope it is gone, however it still shows up on the intranet..........:rolleyes:

hostiehood ??????? WTF.
Does that mean there is a pilothood???

Sounds more than a little misogynistic to me

Actually,I doubt many pilots would have the temperament for the job.

Tell that to the BA cabin crew who were on the 777 the other day.Just don't be next to any of them when you say it.

Actually Eclan, it's what most GA pilots do before joining an airline!

It's what I do as a full time job .. as well as fly the aeroplane! :uhoh:

Oops. I forgot the catering. I pick that up on the way to work. :E

yeah,I know what you mean guys.
A good mate of mine drives big trucks,B doubles and he does the same.
Refuelling,catering,loading and securing your cargo,all the paperwork,driving and radio calls,long days,huge hours and in all sorts of weather and all on your own.
Yep,you guys do it tough.

Well back to the topic I dont think anyone should be arguing about doing each others jobs in detail, its only about sitting at a door for T/O and landing and purely the safety aspects ie an evacuation or the such. I would hope any S/O whether brand new cadet or crusty old one could do that competently, they all have done EP's after all! I hope this gets withdrawn, if there is a shortfall of cabin crew for any reason, thats tough luck for the company, up to them to get another one or offload pax IMO. The more eyes up the front for takeoff the landing the better... well my 2 cents worth, probably 4 cents worth these days for inflation...:rolleyes:

I could not agree more Angle of Attack and all crew would much prefer to have tech crew where they are supposed to be.An extra pair of eyes on the flight deck is like insurance.
The bottom line is that if the company wants to operate with the minimum cabin crew then they have to accept the consequences when something like up line sickness happens.

The Next step
 

The issue here is not what they are planning but what's the next step?

Take this as a hypothesis.

........ Scene Cabin Services monthly meeting........

Hey i just thought of this we can do a service with two crew less, its takes 20 minutes more but we can do it and it saves Cabin Services 10 million a year in reduced crewing costs etc.....i'll tell you about it for a bonus.

Bring Bring

"Hello DCPFO speaking"

"Hi DCPFO we have worked out a way we can save 10 million a year but are wondering do you have two spare EPs trained crew you can do without for To and LDG?"

Call me cynical but this is very tongue in cheek

"Oh and you get 5% of the saving"

"Why yes i do as a matter of fact"

All of a sudden we have SO always in the cabin, after all climb and descent are not included in their flight times anyway! By LAW

Where does it stop.

WE JUST LOST SAFETY IN LATE NIGHT DEPARTURES IN HOW MANY FLIGHTS A DAY?

Someone needs to have the balls to say no!

certainly beware the precedent in EVERYTHING however....the intel is that this FSO will be killed off - the only a/c really at risk (and the a/c in the incident which was the precipe for the FSO in the first place) is the 330-200...... 8 x doors and 8 x crew.

Info from the Mrs: I'm told that the routes flown and the nature the cabin service requirements (36 J) will result in a more sensible allocation of the additional crew member in the cabin.

In the meantime until the FSO is pulled, I'm sure there wouldn't be anything "extraordinary" enough that would not warrant waiting for a replacement CC to pax in.

SO pls remain in your seat.

Incorrect. It does count towards flight time. Climb and descent does not count towards flight deck duty time which is a completely separate kettle of fish and is essentially irrelevant in four crew ops anyway. It would perhaps play a part in a three pilot ops flight but only at the extremes of flight times....about 12 hours.