CASAs exemptions from flight time limitations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Melbourne
Age: 53
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASAs exemptions from flight time limitations
CASA's Exemptions from flight time limitations
I have been trying to find out from CASA which airlines have flight time limitation (regulation) exemptions. Casa only makes available some companies who have them, the rest are 'confidential' - as are the conditions for each airline. Wouldnt you know it is the major airlines whose confidentiality is being protected.
Given that the only 'standard exemption' that I have seen enable airlines to roster 16 hour shifts, and only guarantee a 7 hour break if the pilot starts between 1 and 4 am - it seems pretty bloody scary that there are others that they are hiding.
Is anybody working on this 'standard exemption' or worse ?
Can anyone tell me whether Jetstar or Tiger have these exemptions ?
I have been trying to find out from CASA which airlines have flight time limitation (regulation) exemptions. Casa only makes available some companies who have them, the rest are 'confidential' - as are the conditions for each airline. Wouldnt you know it is the major airlines whose confidentiality is being protected.
Given that the only 'standard exemption' that I have seen enable airlines to roster 16 hour shifts, and only guarantee a 7 hour break if the pilot starts between 1 and 4 am - it seems pretty bloody scary that there are others that they are hiding.
Is anybody working on this 'standard exemption' or worse ?
Can anyone tell me whether Jetstar or Tiger have these exemptions ?
welcome to pprune ms buster... i believe almost every operator has exemptions from the flight and duty time limitations... and yes it does make a mockery of the original legislation... and yes it does have safety implications. For further info search on these forums for fatigue 
Exemptions
A small point of order; there are no "exemptions" from Flight & Duty time limitations, however there are concessions, or (in the case of many airlines) an approved flight & duty time scheme.
Whilst not wishing to debate the merits (or otherwise) of such schemes, they tend to be tailored to the nature of the operators flying. Simply put, there is not much point in having a fleet of long-haul aircraft if your crews are limited to 8 hours stick time.
Most approved schemes nowadays require some form of fatigue management system as well.
Whilst not wishing to debate the merits (or otherwise) of such schemes, they tend to be tailored to the nature of the operators flying. Simply put, there is not much point in having a fleet of long-haul aircraft if your crews are limited to 8 hours stick time.
Most approved schemes nowadays require some form of fatigue management system as well.
From the CASA web site.
I believe this is a Government requirement that all Exemptions are made public. Where did the 'confidential' bit come from?
All exemptions issued by CASA since 1 July 1997 are now available for download as a comma-delimited text file. This file can be opened in any spreadsheet or database program.
Casa only makes available some companies who have them, the rest are 'confidential' - as are the conditions for each airline.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love how a computer program categorically tells me I'm not fatigued. It was a tight call on the smilie between 
. They're all applicable when you're talking about FAID...
It was a tight call on the smilie between . They're all applicable when you're talking about FAID...
FAID
MsBuster,
aside***
while you are researching the topic... perhaps you may also be interested in how general aviation Pilots are awarded (monetarily) by such approved fatigue analysis related exemptions/ concessions... e.g. from my experience - they arn't, i.e. split duty.
RANT****
I'm more than happy to be paid for a 40 hour working week and be at work for 70 hours thanks to all who have implemented FAID without paying the Pilot for his/her time.
aside***
while you are researching the topic... perhaps you may also be interested in how general aviation Pilots are awarded (monetarily) by such approved fatigue analysis related exemptions/ concessions... e.g. from my experience - they arn't, i.e. split duty.
RANT****
I'm more than happy to be paid for a 40 hour working week and be at work for 70 hours
thanks to all who have implemented FAID without paying the Pilot for his/her time.
Last edited by NOSIGN; 29th Oct 2009 at 05:28. Reason: sex
How you get paid is between you and your employer and a separate issue from flight and duty limitations. Also FAID gives you a fatigue score based on the assumption that you are getting good rest in your time free of duty, if you aren't then it is up to you to have the balls to stay at home. It's your responsibility to not come in to work if you are fatigued.
That said, the problem I have with self monitoring your fatigue levels is that fatigued people are like drunks, they don't make good decisions, including the decision to not to work.
That said, the problem I have with self monitoring your fatigue levels is that fatigued people are like drunks, they don't make good decisions, including the decision to not to work.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Melbourne
Age: 53
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im not a journalist - so dont be kind!
Im an industry researcher - i am doing some research on the impact of the new Open Skies agreements with EU, and others. What I was looking at was the difference in 'regulated standards of fatigue management' by the different regulators.
The only other 'cross country comparisons' look only at the regulated standard, which turns out to be pretty meaningless because as far as I can gather, everybody gets an exemption from this standard.
As a result, the actual 'standard' conditions are different than the ones people actually work. Its very misleading. Moreover, the union info seems to demonstrate that there are different working hours for pilots with union agreements and pilots who negotiate themselves. As such there seems to be a 3 tiered system in reality - with nobody at the top.
Its potentially good news, because the international regulators require 'harmonisation' of safety standards, and it appears as though Australian working time expectations are lower than the countries we'd be harmonising with.
601 - It was CASA who told me it was not a complete list as some are confidential. I too was very surprised, and am looking into it, as i was told that this was for 'commerical in confidence' reasons. It seems very odd that the safety regulator gives primacy to confidentiality over safety, but apparently so. (When I asked if should not be alarmed if companies are claiming flight duties were CIC, as it indicated they are seeking to compete on the basis of extending pilots working hours - I didnt get a reply)
I would love to be corrected/know what head of power to use to bypass this reason to access the information, so a reasonable comparison of 'regulated working hours' are known.
Thanks to the guys who genuinely responded.
ps - the international harmonisation is the reason that CASA regs are becoming legislation - it is a demand being made of other countries negotiation Air Services Agreements, who must be equally surprised at some of the deviations of practice from regulated standards.
Im an industry researcher - i am doing some research on the impact of the new Open Skies agreements with EU, and others. What I was looking at was the difference in 'regulated standards of fatigue management' by the different regulators.
The only other 'cross country comparisons' look only at the regulated standard, which turns out to be pretty meaningless because as far as I can gather, everybody gets an exemption from this standard.
As a result, the actual 'standard' conditions are different than the ones people actually work. Its very misleading. Moreover, the union info seems to demonstrate that there are different working hours for pilots with union agreements and pilots who negotiate themselves. As such there seems to be a 3 tiered system in reality - with nobody at the top.
Its potentially good news, because the international regulators require 'harmonisation' of safety standards, and it appears as though Australian working time expectations are lower than the countries we'd be harmonising with.
601 - It was CASA who told me it was not a complete list as some are confidential. I too was very surprised, and am looking into it, as i was told that this was for 'commerical in confidence' reasons. It seems very odd that the safety regulator gives primacy to confidentiality over safety, but apparently so. (When I asked if should not be alarmed if companies are claiming flight duties were CIC, as it indicated they are seeking to compete on the basis of extending pilots working hours - I didnt get a reply)
I would love to be corrected/know what head of power to use to bypass this reason to access the information, so a reasonable comparison of 'regulated working hours' are known.
Thanks to the guys who genuinely responded.
ps - the international harmonisation is the reason that CASA regs are becoming legislation - it is a demand being made of other countries negotiation Air Services Agreements, who must be equally surprised at some of the deviations of practice from regulated standards.
