OZ 717's with 3 Cabin Crew! Is this a joke?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: WA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OZ 717's with 3 Cabin Crew! Is this a joke?
Now we are interested to hear the opinions of the hundreds of cabin crew (god know's there on to their 4th paint job) who have worked on the Boeing 717 in Australia. The newest operator of the B717 (do the math!) has just gained approval from our friends at CASA to have 3 cabin crew on board the A/C whenever they like (none of this sickness bull****e in an 'outport') aslong as total numbers obviously don't exceed 108 (+5 child/INF), lets hear your opinion. Obviously our biggest concern other than we are run off our feet is that the 2nd Cabin Crew at the FWD station in the event of an emergency, has to run 14 rows to the rear of the A/C (obviously against the flow of 70 pax that wanna get the F%*K out, to assist opening the 4 overwing exits), is CASA for real?? Another concern by crew is that if we do see the return of 'J class', this will most definitely see A/C capacity reduced from 115/117 to below 108, and we can definitely say goodbye to ever having 4 crew again (god knows we might as well say goodbye now). Then we'll have 8+ 'J class' (or 12 as they had in the QLink Mark I days) a giant booze run and hot meals for our mining friends on flights some lucky to be an hour long. I won't even go in to the politics behind the initial application, but lets just say this new 'ruling' is being put to good use already, and its only been a week!!! And what makes us really mad is that not even JQ stooped this low to use 3 Cabin Crew on the B717, and they are a low cost/low fare airline! We are full service/full fare!!! Our customers have had the 146 piece of crap for up to 10 years on some services (and for those of you unaware of their condition, I can say that I have had atleast 10 pax in my 3 year career ask me "is this thing airworthy?") anyway, finally our customers have these shiny new jets to commute in and an overall better service due to no 'J class' and an extra crew member, only to have this dumped on us! On 2 flights so far, we have been flat out having time to do tea and coffee now once we take $300 in the bar! Don't our customers deserve better??? Cheers guys, stick in there... I know, just when we got real aeroplanes and all... 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel for you with 3 crew for such a big aircraft flying quite short sectors.
QF now has us in shorthaul operating a re-config 767-300 that has 30/222. Thats with 4 crew in econ to look after 222. Now on a dinner service to Brisbane - hot meals, free grog when it's full on a 1hr flight it is out of control!
Dont be sitting in the last 10-15 rows and expect to be able to eat and enjoy a drink and if you do it's given to you on top of descent and then the crew are getting cabin prep and clearing half eaten meals.
And yes, this is also on a full service "premium" carrier!!!
Its a joke.
QF now has us in shorthaul operating a re-config 767-300 that has 30/222. Thats with 4 crew in econ to look after 222. Now on a dinner service to Brisbane - hot meals, free grog when it's full on a 1hr flight it is out of control!
Dont be sitting in the last 10-15 rows and expect to be able to eat and enjoy a drink and if you do it's given to you on top of descent and then the crew are getting cabin prep and clearing half eaten meals.
And yes, this is also on a full service "premium" carrier!!!
Its a joke.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
boeingwest
Im not that familar with the 717, however:
1. Its legal there are only 108 passengers therefore the law of 1:36 is being abided by.
2. Are the overwing exits self help? If so there is no requirement for the 2nd cabin crew member in the 4wrd part of the aircraft to even try and get to these exits. We have underwing exits on the Dash 8 100/200 and these are strictly self help.
3. From memory the 717 has 3 main exits 2 at the front and 1 at the back therefore 3 cabin crew are available to open these main exists.
4. The following is a notice issued to Impulse Airlines crew back in 2003 from www.faaadomestic.org.au so as you can see this is not the first time this issue has been raised by an airline operating the 717
IMP12-03 - 7 October, 2003
THREE CREW OPERATIONS
A large number of members have contacted the Association, concerned with Impulses’ planned introduction (detailed inside the new OM12) of Three Crew Operations.
It is the understanding of the Association that Impulse wishes to utilise Three Crew Operations in circumstances where a crew member becomes ill/unable to operate further into a port without a crew base (eg. Hamilton Island).
This method of operating is permitted by CASA, provided that the maximum passenger load for the aircraft is 108 (1 Flight Attendant per 36 passengers).
Reduced crewing is not a new phenomenon. However, it is most certainly a new method of working at Impulse, and the Association will be raising with the company shortly its’ plans on:
· When and how Three Crew Operations will occur (ie. Defined circumstances)
· Selection of a Purser, in circumstances where the crew are three Flight Attendants
· A Higher Duties Allowance for Flight Attendants who act in the role as Purser
Members should be aware that at this stage, Impulse has not made clear whether or not they wish to use this as a planning tool (either on a rostered or day-to-day basis).
Members be advised that should this occur prior to formal discussion on this mode of operation, the inflight service will need to be reduced to facilitate the loss of one Flight Attendant.
5. Qantas/National Jet or any airline within the Qantas Group could care less about our customers its all about performance bonus' for senior qantas executives and return to shareholders. In National Jets case they had to come in very low on their bid to operate these aircrafts therefore if a saving can be made anywhere like any airline today they will find it.
6. As Sydney s/h noted they cant even get their work done with the crew they carry on mainline aircraft. Therefore if you cant get it done so be it. If enough customers complain maybe National Jet/Qantas we revisit the issue of 3 cabin crew or adjust the service to reflect the reduced crew and time constraints.
Im not that familar with the 717, however:
1. Its legal there are only 108 passengers therefore the law of 1:36 is being abided by.
2. Are the overwing exits self help? If so there is no requirement for the 2nd cabin crew member in the 4wrd part of the aircraft to even try and get to these exits. We have underwing exits on the Dash 8 100/200 and these are strictly self help.
3. From memory the 717 has 3 main exits 2 at the front and 1 at the back therefore 3 cabin crew are available to open these main exists.
4. The following is a notice issued to Impulse Airlines crew back in 2003 from www.faaadomestic.org.au so as you can see this is not the first time this issue has been raised by an airline operating the 717
IMP12-03 - 7 October, 2003
THREE CREW OPERATIONS
A large number of members have contacted the Association, concerned with Impulses’ planned introduction (detailed inside the new OM12) of Three Crew Operations.
It is the understanding of the Association that Impulse wishes to utilise Three Crew Operations in circumstances where a crew member becomes ill/unable to operate further into a port without a crew base (eg. Hamilton Island).
This method of operating is permitted by CASA, provided that the maximum passenger load for the aircraft is 108 (1 Flight Attendant per 36 passengers).
Reduced crewing is not a new phenomenon. However, it is most certainly a new method of working at Impulse, and the Association will be raising with the company shortly its’ plans on:
· When and how Three Crew Operations will occur (ie. Defined circumstances)
· Selection of a Purser, in circumstances where the crew are three Flight Attendants
· A Higher Duties Allowance for Flight Attendants who act in the role as Purser
Members should be aware that at this stage, Impulse has not made clear whether or not they wish to use this as a planning tool (either on a rostered or day-to-day basis).
Members be advised that should this occur prior to formal discussion on this mode of operation, the inflight service will need to be reduced to facilitate the loss of one Flight Attendant.
5. Qantas/National Jet or any airline within the Qantas Group could care less about our customers its all about performance bonus' for senior qantas executives and return to shareholders. In National Jets case they had to come in very low on their bid to operate these aircrafts therefore if a saving can be made anywhere like any airline today they will find it.
6. As Sydney s/h noted they cant even get their work done with the crew they carry on mainline aircraft. Therefore if you cant get it done so be it. If enough customers complain maybe National Jet/Qantas we revisit the issue of 3 cabin crew or adjust the service to reflect the reduced crew and time constraints.
Although only slightly smaller, the F100 flies in Australia with 3 cabin crew with the same restriction of passengers.
Its bloody hard work on short sectors less than 45mins (if you have a full service and business class to do but its not impossible.
Granted, with only 100 seats on board, we had to have quite a few infants to make that 108, but it has happened several times (mainly in png). (as you guys will probably know, lots of infants can also make a busy flight even though they dont get the meal service).
717 also has that extra exit down the back - so not exactly the same...
Its bloody hard work on short sectors less than 45mins (if you have a full service and business class to do but its not impossible.
Granted, with only 100 seats on board, we had to have quite a few infants to make that 108, but it has happened several times (mainly in png). (as you guys will probably know, lots of infants can also make a busy flight even though they dont get the meal service).
717 also has that extra exit down the back - so not exactly the same...
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe if you didn't insist on paxing one sector of a four sector day there wouldn't be a need to operate with reduced crewing. Now a four sector day requires five cabin crew with one paxing on each sector.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am very curious when all this happened. I have a family member about to start next week with NJS on the Qantaslink contract and NJS seem to very staff friendly so It must be all about the $$$$. Can someone tell me just how secure is NJS's contract on the 717's as this seems to becoming out of left field!Is this instigated by NJS or have QF squeezed them on costs. Would love some geniune feedback.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ditzyboy -
That's odd that the R1 FA (or No. 2 as you call them) would have to assist at the Owing exits... At The Star it is the OWA position that is made redundant in reduced crew operations. The pax operate the Owing exits unsupervised and the 3 remaining crew operate the main door exits.
I actually had the honour (?) of being on the first crew that ever operated reduce-crewed on the 717 and it was also the first time one of our flights had gone without a Purser. And this was before it was even in our manual! CASA gave the appropriate approvals and off we went. It then became part of our manual to reduce crew in unplanned circumstances only. We were told the 717 cannot go out with 3 FAs planned (or out of a crew port) as there has not been a evacuation test with 3 crew. There is also an 'understanding' between the FAAA and The Star that reduce crew will only be in unplanned circumstances out of non crew ports - both aircraft types.
As for operating with a FA on higher duties as CM - that has just been abused to death by the company ever since!
That's odd that the R1 FA (or No. 2 as you call them) would have to assist at the Owing exits... At The Star it is the OWA position that is made redundant in reduced crew operations. The pax operate the Owing exits unsupervised and the 3 remaining crew operate the main door exits.
I actually had the honour (?) of being on the first crew that ever operated reduce-crewed on the 717 and it was also the first time one of our flights had gone without a Purser. And this was before it was even in our manual! CASA gave the appropriate approvals and off we went. It then became part of our manual to reduce crew in unplanned circumstances only. We were told the 717 cannot go out with 3 FAs planned (or out of a crew port) as there has not been a evacuation test with 3 crew. There is also an 'understanding' between the FAAA and The Star that reduce crew will only be in unplanned circumstances out of non crew ports - both aircraft types.
As for operating with a FA on higher duties as CM - that has just been abused to death by the company ever since!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: WA
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SYDNEY S/H: What am I complaining about? That sucks, 222 in Y on a one hour between 4 of you, that IS a joke, I'm sorry. I mean its not as if we work for the "red rat", were only the contractor, still many of us have a conscious when it comes to whats good/bad customer service.
EASTERN BOY: The OWE are not self help with us, at J* I believe they were in a 3 crew config. Yeah well it is interesting to see where the FAAA is on this one. There are 2 main issues here! Yes, I agree the 3 crew config can be done, you can't fight savings, however, we have 2 crew at the front and 1 at the rear CC station. The issue is, if it hits the fan, no. 3 CC has to fight the flow of 14 rows (70 pax) and assist in opening the exits. I believe there should be 2 Cabin Crew at the rear and only the sector purser at the front of the A/C, it makes sense, and too believe CASA has approved the current config is scary to be honest! Yes I agree, the old "lets try and do it, and we'll just hope enough people complain". Well we have had this happening from I can gather for ever and a day. We have 100 series 146's (65 pax) and they are prone to the APU dying as soon as the outside temp rises, it is wrong the things that occur such as pax and crew vomiting and passing out, yet this issue is never addressed!! The issue is money, we have been taken over by a new company, and as it happens, they want $AVINGS!!! The 2nd issue is obviously we have to all work extremely hard, and the service doesn't flow like it should, and a 5 minute break, what is that????
VC9: Care to explain that post? I am confused.
WINE O BABE: This happened effective Monday. Yeah they are staff friendly, its hard adjusting from a company that used to splash the money around "heck don't take a $25 cab, we've got the same limos that QF tech crew use pick you up at a cost of $60", to a company that has tighten their belt.
EASTERN BOY: The OWE are not self help with us, at J* I believe they were in a 3 crew config. Yeah well it is interesting to see where the FAAA is on this one. There are 2 main issues here! Yes, I agree the 3 crew config can be done, you can't fight savings, however, we have 2 crew at the front and 1 at the rear CC station. The issue is, if it hits the fan, no. 3 CC has to fight the flow of 14 rows (70 pax) and assist in opening the exits. I believe there should be 2 Cabin Crew at the rear and only the sector purser at the front of the A/C, it makes sense, and too believe CASA has approved the current config is scary to be honest! Yes I agree, the old "lets try and do it, and we'll just hope enough people complain". Well we have had this happening from I can gather for ever and a day. We have 100 series 146's (65 pax) and they are prone to the APU dying as soon as the outside temp rises, it is wrong the things that occur such as pax and crew vomiting and passing out, yet this issue is never addressed!! The issue is money, we have been taken over by a new company, and as it happens, they want $AVINGS!!! The 2nd issue is obviously we have to all work extremely hard, and the service doesn't flow like it should, and a 5 minute break, what is that????
VC9: Care to explain that post? I am confused.
WINE O BABE: This happened effective Monday. Yeah they are staff friendly, its hard adjusting from a company that used to splash the money around "heck don't take a $25 cab, we've got the same limos that QF tech crew use pick you up at a cost of $60", to a company that has tighten their belt.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: ---
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeingwest,
A LOT of us at the "red rat" or Qantas have a conscience as to what good and bad customer service is too, it's just unfortunate that the company and CASA let us operate as minimum crew which is hard work for the crew and bad service for the pax (not all of the time). Yes, you don't work for the "red rat", but you have signed a contract stating that you will fly under the QantasLink banner, so i guess that means you just have to go with the flow, but definately voice your concern.
we operate on a 737-400 with a total of 144 pax and 4 crew. The 4 crew are assigned as door primaries and then the two overwing exits are to be operated by the pax seated in those rows.
Oz
A LOT of us at the "red rat" or Qantas have a conscience as to what good and bad customer service is too, it's just unfortunate that the company and CASA let us operate as minimum crew which is hard work for the crew and bad service for the pax (not all of the time). Yes, you don't work for the "red rat", but you have signed a contract stating that you will fly under the QantasLink banner, so i guess that means you just have to go with the flow, but definately voice your concern.
we operate on a 737-400 with a total of 144 pax and 4 crew. The 4 crew are assigned as door primaries and then the two overwing exits are to be operated by the pax seated in those rows.
Oz
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The nearest white sandy beach
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA don't give a rats (no pun intended) about whether you can or can't get the cabin service done. They only care about SAFETY. If they believe (and in this case they do) that a 717 can be safely evacuated with 3 cabin crew and it fits within the 1:36 rule, then what is the problem?
If the company wants to put ridiculous service levels on board then that's an issue for the company, not CASA! If you are unable to complete your service duties, or if service duties begin to impede on your safety responsibilities then you need to address that with both the FAAA and the airline concerned.
Safe Flying.
SG
If the company wants to put ridiculous service levels on board then that's an issue for the company, not CASA! If you are unable to complete your service duties, or if service duties begin to impede on your safety responsibilities then you need to address that with both the FAAA and the airline concerned.
Safe Flying.
SG
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: ---
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SYDGirl,
my point was, CASA have in place this ratio of 1:36 and maybe even 1:50 if this stupid bill of amendment gets in, so the company play on it and push it to its extremes. So the company is responsible for 99% of issues with not enough crew onboard, but then i believe 1% is attributed to CASA for having this ratio in place.
my point was, CASA have in place this ratio of 1:36 and maybe even 1:50 if this stupid bill of amendment gets in, so the company play on it and push it to its extremes. So the company is responsible for 99% of issues with not enough crew onboard, but then i believe 1% is attributed to CASA for having this ratio in place.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The nearest white sandy beach
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With all due respect OZcabincrew, I disagree.
CASA believes that a B717 can be safely evacuated with only three cabin crew. This aircraft only has three doors!
The overwing (or underwing, depending on which a/c type we want to talk about) exits are designed to be self-help (ie. pax operated) exits and do not require a cabin crew member to operate these in an emergency. In fact, statistically it is the overwing exits that get opened most frequently in evacuations!
The issue here is safety. It is safe to operate this aircraft with three cabin crew. The fact that it is bloody impossible to get the service done due to ludicrous workload levels is unfortunately totally irrelevant.
SG
Wanted to add that whilst I vehemently oppose the introduction of a 1:50 ratio, I do believe it will come in. The precedent is already set.
CASA believes that a B717 can be safely evacuated with only three cabin crew. This aircraft only has three doors!
The overwing (or underwing, depending on which a/c type we want to talk about) exits are designed to be self-help (ie. pax operated) exits and do not require a cabin crew member to operate these in an emergency. In fact, statistically it is the overwing exits that get opened most frequently in evacuations!
The issue here is safety. It is safe to operate this aircraft with three cabin crew. The fact that it is bloody impossible to get the service done due to ludicrous workload levels is unfortunately totally irrelevant.
SG
Wanted to add that whilst I vehemently oppose the introduction of a 1:50 ratio, I do believe it will come in. The precedent is already set.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1:50
1:50? Yes it will be the norm, just a matter of the paper shuffling between the bureaucrats and anxious meetings with mgmnt/union officials. 1:50 is regarded as 'World Standard' now.
As the saying goes "you can't fight City Hall"
As the saying goes "you can't fight City Hall"
