ditch, fully comprehend that Peg was referring to techie crew rest seats. The tech crew rest seat on the 767 got given away very frequently when not required by the tech crew. Even when required by the crew we would occasionally still use it as long as the cabin crew had a plan for where the person we put in it for takeoff and landing was going to go for the rest of the flight. The said 'person' could vary from a partner of one of the crew and I recall at least one occasions where the person in that seat for T/O and landing wasn't anything to do with any air crew member.

The upper deck crew rest seat on the 744 is not suitable for use take off or landing but was always given away to the cabin crew or other beneficiaries when not required by the tech crew. It enables the person to sit in the C/C rest for Take off and not take up one of their crew rest seats in flight.

Peg, it seems as well as a chip on your shoulder you also don't get sarcasm or understand emoticons. I guess that's consistent with your demonstrated lack of EI thus far. You're welcome to any un-used tech crew rest seats on any flight I operate. Now if only you could arrange a transfer for me back to a fleet that has them fitted to more than two aircraft! :}

Lol @ Capt Fathom.

Keg ..drop me a line and i will do what i can for you ...my powers are limited though

i will have a chat to Al for you...he will have a lot of spare A/C coming up by the sound of things so there could well be a bit of movement for us all

Pegs post #40 is exactly spot on about the use of cabin crew rest seats. Any other interpretation is incorrect.

After reading this response from twiggs about the use of cabin crew jump seats.I'd almost forgotten about another of twiggs posts about the use of cabin crew jump seats when talking about cabin crew rest breaks and seats.For my money I don't think using cabin crew jump seats for staff is a good idea.It does not look good to other passengers and from a safety viewpoint it is very shortsighted.

Pegasus, I have never, ever seen a tech crew rest seat refused on the grounds of what the EBA says we're entitled to. We cannot lose our licence for waiving an EBA entitlement. We sure as heck can for ignoring a CASA regulation.
Yeah ditch handle, once again I'm going to re-iterate that the "techies won't let us use crew rest seats" argument is crap. I cannot think of any other way of putting it. We are aware of the difference between rest seats, jump seats, etc. We have them too, remember?

Keg is exactly correct that tech crew rest, R-E-S-T, seats have often been made available on full a/c for family members of all descriptions. In fact I agree again with Keg in that in 10 years I've never seen them refused for no good reason. On one occasion we even copped a "tech crew checks" delay to do it on the 767, which required an engineer to be instructed to come back up the aerobridge and reconfigure it! This makes two extra passenger seats available which are blocked out during the booking process, but prevents the tech crew rest from being reclined, which has CASA implications. Of course he didn't mind as long as we (tech crew) copped the delay, and in fact his parting words after doing the reconfig were extremely complimentary. The CSM was the same. As much as this revelation will abjectly shock and horrify management types (maybe certain former CEOs will do the world a favour and have a coronary over it), most of us believe in looking after our own fellow crew members, front and back, and their families.

Reasons that a tech crew rest seat would be refused are almost exclusively CASA-related where things like, for example, flight deck duty limits cannot otherwise be complied with. On some a/c the "seat not to be occupied for takeoff or landing" placard comes into consideration too. Also the post 9/11 restrictions affect it on aircraft like the 744, where the tech crew rest which can be occupied for takeoff & landing is actually inside the restricted cockpit area. These are unfortunately problems which neither myself, nor Keg, nor any other tech crew can solve.

I dont see an issue.as long as cabin crew still get the say on who gets the jumpseats.after all the tech crew get discretion on their jumpseats, so should we.as we currently do with the cabin crew rest seats.

I think you need to read the thread from the start cart_elevator, you seem to have missed what the new policy for flight deck jump seats and cabin crew jumpseats is now.
FYI, cabin crew will not have a say regarding the use of spare cabin crew jumpseats, it will be at the discretion of the captain.
Cabin crew only make the decision re the use of our crew rest seats.

It's an ill conceived knee jerk reaction that I'll be very surprised to see get up.

Ditch - it is up. A current FSO states it. Whether it changes or not is a different story. Hopefully it will revert to having family members allowed back on flight deck, rather than some unknown potentially disgruntled commuter.

whatever happens usually does ,but remember this from a regular contributor

Again, so we don't get bogged down into who's right and who isn't, blueloo is absolutely 100% correct.

As a last resort, unoccupied cabin crew assist jumpseats may be alloted to family members at the Captain's discretion. Flight Standing Order 125/2009 refers. Applies to all aircraft except the 737.

That's it. End of story. Game over. Full time - for the moment at least. My humble apologies to those who don't like it. None of this would be an issue if the faceless bureaucrats working in DOTARS (or whatever its latest silly abbreviation is) applied a little common sense to their job, which appears to be asking far too much of them.

...wot dutch roll sed....

That you can quote the FSO number still doesn't take away from the fact that it remains a jerk reaction and ill considered on many many grounds.

Self interest aside of course :rolleyes:

I reckon despite the FSO that the fat lady hasn't sung yet.......

Whats with this self interest theme you keep on banging on about ditch?

Whose self interest? Is it the person who wrote the FSO, the company for allowing the FSO, the Captains in the future who may or may not avail themselves of the opportunity to allow someone be it a traveling companion, cabin crew, cabin members traveling companion?

Let me put it to you this way :rolleyes:

If the cabin crew lost the ability to use their crew rest seats to onload family members accompanying them do you think the same policy would be enacted?

That was a rhetorical question as we both know it wouldn't.

Now I find it next to impossible to believe that tech crew like yourself would argue for this initiative to be introduced under these circumstances for the many and varied reasons that have already been mentioned.

Self interest.

Get it?

I still think you are missing something here.

Yes it is the Captains right to choose who this may be offered to.

Yes it may be offered to the Captains or other tech crew members companions first - which is where your self interest theme seems to be directed.

...in reality though and this will no doubt depend on where the jet is headed, how many sectors of all sectors available will it be used for tech crew members traveling companions? by and large not many - maybe it will be skewed towards international destinations where crew get longer slips.........

Therefore it leaves the seat(s) available for essentially 1+ (no idea how many seats are avail on the diff configs) extra staff member be they Captains companion or another aircrew members beneficiary.

Its this other aircrew members beneficiary bit I believe you are missing. If the seat is available, there are only a few Capts around who will refuse it for other aircrew members staff beneficiary.

Surely getting as many staff away as possible is not self interest?

So you think this is a good idea and should be implemented regardless of whether the rear flight deck jump seats are available for "travel companion" onload or not?

Bugger me drunk.

Dutchy puts on Gollum "Lord of the Rings" mask..............

It's mi-i-i-i-ine, me precious, mine! Precious cabin crew jumpseat! Smeagol won't let precious be taken away! Aaaaaaargh!!!! Nasty techie Captain's trying to steal precious! Aaaaaaargh!!!! Smeagol not happy. Not happy. Smeagol going to get precious back. Smeagol wants precious but nasty hobbit tech crew trying to deprive Smeagol of what is rightfully his! Aaaaaargh!!!!

......and so began the Fellowship Of The Tech Crew to cast the cabin crew jumpseats into the fires of Mount Doom.

So you think this is a good idea and should be implemented regardless of whether the rear flight deck jump seats are available for "travel companion" onload or not?

ditch handle, you seem to have missed the fact that the rear flight deck jump seats are no longer available for travel companion onload, hence the need for the new cabin crew jump seat policy.

Gee Twiggs.

Really.:rolleyes:

Tell me you were trying to be ironic......?:}

___________

Again........

Blueloo,

so you think this is a good idea and should be implemented regardless of whether the rear flight deck jump seats are available for "travel companion" onload or not?

DH I don't think you have grasped the situation. The Tech Crew Rest seats are ONLY available when a long haul aircraft flies a two pilot crew.

That is a rare circumstance. Otherwise they are used by Tech Crew for required crew rest. They can be used to get someone on board who then must vacate the crew rest if it is required for its designed purpose. Just recently I had a cabin crew member ask to do just that to get his daughter onboard and I willingly obliged like I always do.

The flight deck JUMP seats, cannot be used for any beneficiaries under any circumstances. They used to be available and I have lost count of the number of cabin crew and their beneficiaries who used them when I was flying. That is now history.

You seem to be saying that now that now these jump seats on the flight deck are generally unavailable, then any spare jump seats in the cabin should only be available for cabin crew? What is the logic behind that?

If they are to be generally available then it makes sense to have the aircraft commander, who has the final say on all aspects of the operation, to have the final say on that as well.

i would prefer to have the tech and cabin crew families in the Cabin crew rest seats rather than on display in the cabin on the assist "operational" jump seats

there is no problem with tech or cabin crew families of the operating crew asking for the cc rest seats... i have a problem from a number of perspectives with any "passengers" staff or otherwise on jumpseats in the cabin

Give up ditch you are losing.

Gosh, I'd hate to have you serving me onboard an aircraft. Never wrong, arrogant attitude.

I'll give you some advice, you are wrong here.

Just remember. It's not your aircraft. It's the Captains. Stop the brainwashing, the cc don't own the aircraft, the Captain does. Read the CAR's. :ugh:

No.

What I'm saying is that I don't think cabin crew jump seats should be used for anyone other than operating cabin crew.

I don't think that they should be generally available to anyone whether they be the family of cabin crew, tech crew or Alan Joyce.

My point is that you lot [pilots] wouldn't be supporting the use of those seats for the family of cabin crew if the situation was reversed.

Not because you are priques by the way but because I'm certain you would identify that from an operational perspective the policy is flawed.

It's my firmly held view that it's supported by pilots only because you've lost due to a change in regs any autonomous alternative.

Forgive me but you blokes [and girls] are professionals [funbags excluded] and I find this policy operationally flawed and the position of pilots who support it, hypocritical.

Written a report yet Ditch? It'll only be with people putting a burst in that you can hope to have it changed!

No, not yet however I'm reasonably certain that it is being seen to.

My God!

What a fantastic work environment you lot have!

You actually work on the same plane together? :uhoh:

It almost borders on hatred! What's going on?

You'll of course find that those arguing against this policy are advocating that no one uses the seats except operating crew.

Capiche?? :rolleyes:

I ask that both sides in this debate insert another word into your discourse . . . CUSTOMER.

Just for fun, and with no offense and the greatest respect, I modified “ditch handle’s” latest post (although I could have picked others) and I ask you all to take a look at yourselves.

I read somewhere else today that BA has taken another step to becoming a LCC . . . no meals (after 1000hrs) on flights less than 2.5 hours. Maybe QF will follow?

Increasingly we ask what is the differential ‘value proposition’ that ‘full service’ airlines like QF says it offers its CUSTOMERS . . . other than paying for generous staff travel benefits, unfunded ‘pensions’ and unused frequent flyer points – all accrued in a previous era.

I assure you it is in my interests to see QF to remain and safe and prosperous airline . . . but these discussions don’t imbibe confidence.

Best to all

Cheers

Pedota

No.

What I'm saying is that I don't think customer seats should be used for anyone other than customers.

I don't think that they should be generally available to anyone whether they be (sic) the family of economy customer, premium customer or Alan Joyce.

My point is that you lot [Qantas employees] wouldn't be supporting the use of those seats for the family of customers if the situation was reversed.

Not because you are priques (sic) by the way but because I'm certain you would identify that from an operational perspective the policy is flawed.

It's my firmly held view that it's supported by customers only because you've lost due to a change in regs any autonomous alternative (or perhaps changing business models?).

Forgive me but you blokes [and girls] are professionals [funbags excluded] and I find this policy operationally flawed and the position of customers who support it, hypocritical.

Would they be the same customer who pays $160 extra for an exit row only to find someone staring directly at them from the jumpseat, in competion for somewhere to put their legs?

Get over it ladies. For years tech crew have willingly given up flight deck seats to cabin crew and their family members but unfortunately it has not been reciprocated. Best example after 2 CC given flight deck seat CSM advises that the CC jumpseats not available to which hero FA on flightdeck responds"nor should they'. So you lot keep your crew rest seats but I hope you treat any family members on jumpseats with the same respect and grace you and your loved ones have always got on the flight deck. It is the Captains aircraft and at least some balance has been restored. Tech crew can at least now bring their kids away without the worry of some FA objecting to giving up a crew rest seat. While I'm at it I cannot believe CC have denied their own the crew rest.

Just buy backup tickets!
it amazes me how many staff travellers only purchase QF tickets.
Bl00dy tight @rses.

Although I have never voted against giving up my crew rest seat, it infuriates me as these people "knew: the flights were going to be tight!

BUY BACKUPS!

I tend to buy backup tickets wherever possible but they would be a lot more attractive if:

(A) They could be done online without having to spend 2hrs+ on hold with Staff Travel
and..
(B) A refund didn't take at least 2 months

Nunc...

you better read the details....

If you are under the impression it can be used for the skippers kids you are mistaken....

It can only be used by ABP's over the age of 15. Of course if the Kids are 16 or over it wont be a problem but the exit row rule applies

honestly.....let them use the crew jumpseats, if they are that desperate.....
it relieves the pressure in having to give up the crew rest seats.

I think most people will think twice about sitting on the jumpseat at R3 or L3
across from the toilet!
They wont be able to use the CC rest seats as they will be used.

Come on you tight@rses just buy frikking backup tickets, so what if it takes 2 months to get a refund.

Personally I would like to see a ban on staff using any seat other than a pax seat, end of the bloody story, and it relieves the pressure on the CAPT and CSM.

OCCR, why would you buy backup tickets for your family when you want them to travel on YOUR flight, you know, the one you are operating??????

Sure, buy backup tickets when you are all travelling as a family on holidays, but when YOU are operating on the flight, you want your family to travel with you, and that is what we are talking about here, your family using assist seats when the crew member is operating, either tc or cc. It's not rocket science.

Sounds like the LHCC protecting their little empire. Imagine if all the techies over the last thirty years had said no to all LHCC commuters from using the jump seats on the flight deck, due to 'impinging' on our work environment. Imagine all the LHCC that wouldn't have got to work, or would have bought full fare tickets on Ansett, Virgin; even backup tickets! There would have been an uproar, 'stuck up techies' won't give up their jumpseats etc etc etc. You can't win with you guys, always want it your way. :ugh:

I think you will find that this entire issue is because the drivers are upset they can't put the wife on the flight deck anymore.

They put more submissions to CASA and the company to get a dispensation than the UN put out resolutions on Iraq.

They used so much energy and paper in this effort it's a wonder that Islands in the pacific have not gone under because of the increase in global warming and sea levels.:E:E:E

Seriously,let's stop the pi$$ing contest and look at the bigger picture.

I think the bigger issue here is one of safety.As someone else said when I'm walking around the cabin and we hit turbulence it is nice to know that there is a jump seat just ahead of me that I can grab and buckle up.

I don't want to get there and find someones wife or husband stretched out playing soduku

funbags or should I say Pontius pilate because we all know you are not a real pilot.
You never make a post in any of the pilot threads.
You even stalked cabin crew in the cabin crew areas away from D&G areas of pprune.
You admit that you want long haul cabin crew banned.
You are anti long haul cabin crew but pro the cheap QCCA and the overseas bases.

There is only one group who fits that description.The office

To those here who are real crew.Yes it is good when you can take your wife away with you but you have to face facts.Sometimes it is full because it is a business.
I have always bought back up tickets for my wife and kids if I take them away just in case.This is because as my aircraft is leaving I don't want to be worried about them being stuck somewhere.
This is just like insurance and the days of using the flight deck are gone and we have to accept that.We can't always use crew rest because they are here for crew to get rest.

Unfortunately 911 changed just about everything with our job.

This is unbelievable,

LHCC and Techies are all ONE team. What is all this banter about 'restoring the balance of power' and the 'us and them' attitude. We all work together on ONE aircraft and for ONE common purpose, and most of us also want the opportunity to take family members along with us without the stress of having them bumped.

Those who work for the Q, have a think about this: How appropriate or helpful is it debating an internal company policy on a public and anonymous forum? If you have real safety concerns about the policy raise it through the appropriate internal channels.

All you are succeeding on doing here is damaging the Qantas brand and embarrassing all of the reasonable and dedicated Qantas Cabin and Tech crew who enjoy their workplace and the team they work with.

Anyone with any Divisive comments (cabin and tech) are just fueling the divide, I don't care what axe you have to grind, your comments are only going to have a negative effect and you are only making Qantas a worse place to work!

For all those external to Qantas, thankfully the divisive attitude demonstrated here is only a vocal minority and not representative of the wider Cabin and Tech crew TEAM.

Regards,
MHA