Can your employer require you to work on your DDO?
 

This may seem like an easy one to answer on the face of it. But the CAD are apparently now endorsing a new angle on how DDO's are treated, and I think it is worrying - if true.

The definition of a DDO in 'CAP 371 (2nd Edition) - The Avoidance of Fatigue in Aircrews' reads as follows;

7.5 ‘Domestic Day Off (DDO)’
A period at home base available for leisure and relaxation and free of all duties.

That seems pretty clear.

The definition then goes on to define the minimum constituents of a DDO, as follows;

A single DDO shall comprise a minimum of 34 continuous hours and include two local nights. Additional consecutive DDOs must be of at least 24 hours duration and shall include a further local night for each additional DDO. A Rest Period may be included as part of a DDO. [At the request of the individual crew member, and with the agreement of the operator, a DDO may be taken at other than his home base. In this case the crew member will be considered acclimatised to the place where the DDOs are taken, provided the conditions of paragraph 7.1 are met.]

Fair enough - these are the detailed necessary protections that give proper integrity to a Day Off. And in terms of that integrity, in every Jurisdiction I have ever worked in, a ROSTERED DAY OFF was untouchable by Crewing. Immutable. Unchangeable. Guaranteed (unless varied with the voluntary permission of the pilot themselves).

But now comes the interesting part - and I'll have to paraphrase what I've been shown;
The CAD have just stated, in answer to a legal case going on at present in Hong Kong, that if a pilot has received their contracted minimum number of Days Off, and have had sufficient legal minimum rest, any 'ADDITIONAL' Rostered Days Off (beyond the contracted minimum) are surplus, and may be removed or changed at the SOLE discretion of the employer.

"I don't get any 'additional' Days Off!" I hear you say.
But the change could theoretically happen to ANY day on your roster now - whether at the beginning, middle, or end of it - as long as the company can show you are going to receive the minimum legal rest and minimum contracted days off by end of the month in a revised roster.

If you do not have a CONTRACTUAL GUARANTEE saying that Rostered Days Off are set in stone, you are now liable to have any Rostered DDO changed or removed by your employer - and the CAD have legally approved the practice.

Enjoy.

There is an airline in the region that has a similar policy, for foreign pilots only though. They believe they can change, and do, your days off at anytime as they see fit. This includes changing completed duties from STBY to OFF, "because we didn't core you so you were wested."

When asked to explain how come I required to have 10hrs rest after STBY, because it is counted as Duty?
"because we didn't core you so you were wested."

Obviously the regulator will come down on the side of the airline, until there is an accident.
If the flying public understood (not just knew, but understood) some of the stuff airline management do and get away with, they would never step foot on an aircraft again.

To be clear; this is not a CX issue. This affects every pilot working in Hong Kong.
The CAD have now abolished Rostered Day Off Stability as custom and practice.

So it appears that TPE Flyers example is now officially accepted practice in Hong Kong too.

There's just one catch.
The HK Employment Ordinance forbids changing a workers day off without permission (except in emergencies).

So now we have the almost unbelievable scenario of the HKCAD championing unscrupulous employers rights to break the HKEO by abusing pilots rostered days off.

Gobsmacking.

Change my roster in such a manner, you can expect a very serious blow-back. At the very least, off sick for a week or so. This company and their management continue to demonstrate a complete inability to enter into modern day labour relations. They will get the result they deserve.

Don't answer the phone. Simple.

LongTimeInCX
You are correct and I believe the practice is illegal under the EO, but because the FAU doesn't push back it is accepted.

Yes Sir! Varying a scheduled Day Off is clearly illegal under the Hong Kong Employment Ordinance (CAP 57).
To whit;

CAP 57
18. Appointment of rest days
(1) Rest days shall be appointed by an employer and he may
appoint different rest days for different employees. (Amended
71 of 1976 s. 4)
(2) Subject to subsection (4), every employer shall, before the
commencement of every month, inform each employee orally
or in writing of his rest days in that month.

And:

19. Compulsory work on rest days
(1) Subject to subsection (2), no employer shall require an
employee to work on any of his rest days.
(2) An employer may require an employee to work on his rest
day if it is necessary to do so by reason of a breakdown of
machinery or plant or other unforeseen emergency of any
nature.

The CAD may not be interested in enforcing the HKEO, but they might show some more regard for it.

The Law will of course vary in different jurisdictions, and it seems to be practice in Hong Kong also for an employer to count a 'Sick Day' as a 'Rest Day'. I always found that outrageous. It infers that while you are being wracked with severe flu symptoms you are 'resting'. Or having stitches in a gashed noggin, you are 'resting'.
Totally insane.

But here's another question for you.

Is a REST DAY the same as a DDO?
Are the terms interchangeable?

Because I sense the CAD's argument is that they are different. The EO refers to 'Rest Days'. The CAD rules refer to 'DDO's'.
Are they different? If so, did you know all along they were different?

Good point.

Might be a consolation prize since the lions' share of the pilots are in HKG, but in the case of 'onshored' contracts at the bases, these are collectively negotiated contracts and cannot be changed without ratification. As such new conditions cannot be imposed and any terms within it are subject to adjudication in the home country.

blah, blah, blah....etc. Do any of you really want to spend your ENTIRE career fighting such inane and pointless battles? This airline will suck you dry of every fibre of your being. Get out while you can. If not, you will be the bitter old burnt out miserable fossils that didn't heed this same advice. Make your escape now, while there is still the opportunity. Otherwise there is only misery awaiting you.

Correct me please if I'm wrong, but my understanding of the 'O' Day concept was that it is to give the Company the flexibility to roster a kind of 'conditional Day Off/Rest Day'. A facility which allows them to legally circumvent the EO requirement to respect Rest Days, avoid the CAP371 regs on DDO's, and to produce a roster with sufficient notified rest days at the beginning of a month.

This distinction is crucial IMHO, because it clearly implies that airline Managements (or their Legal Depts) do accept Rostered DDO / Rest Days are unchangeable under both CAD and EO regs. Otherwise who needs O Days?

This also implies the two terms (DDO/Rest Day) are protected.

In order to get around it they had to invent a new rostering concept - the O Day - which I presume they argue is actually a Duty Day which can be changed to a Rest Day at short notice, and if it complies with the conditions to qualify as such, it becomes a recognised Rest Day.
Or is it a half arsed 'OFF' day, which is not protected by the DDO terms in the CAD regs, and can therefore become a Duty Day?

It's just a shell game of legal semantics. But these terms need to be clarified in the interests of safety.

Because when your airline actually rosters you for 10 days straight, and claim it is legal because they didn't call you on your STBY (which means you had your legal rest day, and that STBY suddenly changes to OFF after you comleted STBY), the only person who is going to get into the shi!t is YOU, the Pilot.
No one will care until there is an incident/accident. Then the Company will throw the Op's Manual at you in court with the passage underlined,
"It is the Pilots responsibility to ensure compliance with ALL Flight and Duty Limitations".

Well said TPE Flyer - and while the frustration driving some of the flippant comments may be understandable, the reality is that, like it or not, in Hong Kong you may soon be confronted with this nonsense.

The lack of support from the CAD regarding the integrity of Rostered DDO's places us all on a slippery slope - and if you don't believe TPE Flyers scenario could really happen to you, well, just give it time.

Is anyone in the Union exec bothered about this?