CAO 48.1
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scenarios hardly likely in Airline Ops these days...
1/. If you have been out on the piss all night (cos no young pilot has EVER done that )
Is it your employers fault you are hungover?
Should you report for duty secretly impaired?
If you do, is it then your employers fault when you spear into a hill with 9 bods behind you?
2/. You have been up all night shagging your boyfriend/girlfriend/blow-up doll (cos no young pilot has ever done that... probably).
Is it your employers fault that you are such an awesome swordsman?
Should you report for duty secretly impaired?
If you do, whose fault is it when you spear in?
Is it your employers fault you are hungover?
Should you report for duty secretly impaired?
If you do, is it then your employers fault when you spear into a hill with 9 bods behind you?
2/. You have been up all night shagging your boyfriend/girlfriend/blow-up doll (cos no young pilot has ever done that... probably).
Is it your employers fault that you are such an awesome swordsman?
Should you report for duty secretly impaired?
If you do, whose fault is it when you spear in?
I HAVE, HOWEVER, WITNESSED (and experienced) MUCH CREW MEMBER FATIGUE DUE TO HORRENDOUS , UNRELENTING ROSTER PATTERNS WHERE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO BE RESTED SUFFICIENTLY PRIOR TO DUTY!!!
The modern low-cost airline model is guilty of over-scheduling their crew. Pilots are fearful of calling fatigued because management are punitive (but "Safety is our Number 1 Priority" LOL!) and the regulator completely unsupportive.
Sick leave is the only realistic defensive weapon for the individual to protect themselves.
But hey, at least we have those all important $39 fares.
PG
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horatio,
This is my point exactly. The PIC has always had resposibility for the "Safety of flight" it is now that the legislation is trying to quantify the fatigue element in the argument.
When the explanetory statement says the following it is cause for concern.
"When option 2 was released for public consultation the major airlines generally opposed the changes to the prescriptive limits, But supported the increase obligations on their employees."
"Your fitness for work is YOUR responsibility and it doesn't matter by what mechanism you ended up shagged"
Well actually it is the resposibility of the employer and employee... as much as I may not totally agree with it. This is one of the many reasons (but not limited to) people are either in private enterprise for themselves or work for someone.
P.s I am 8 beers in writting this post
This is my point exactly. The PIC has always had resposibility for the "Safety of flight" it is now that the legislation is trying to quantify the fatigue element in the argument.
When the explanetory statement says the following it is cause for concern.
"When option 2 was released for public consultation the major airlines generally opposed the changes to the prescriptive limits, But supported the increase obligations on their employees."
"Your fitness for work is YOUR responsibility and it doesn't matter by what mechanism you ended up shagged"
Well actually it is the resposibility of the employer and employee... as much as I may not totally agree with it. This is one of the many reasons (but not limited to) people are either in private enterprise for themselves or work for someone.
P.s I am 8 beers in writting this post
