Mods,

Well done:ok:

Duty of Care - 2way responsibility
 

Fair comment butterfly, (569)

If the regulators (CAA etc.) deem it legal then it the shortfall may be the lifestyle of those complaining.

It is the responsibility of crew to ensure they make the best effort to maximise their rest period to comply. There are ample opportunities within those regulations to enjoy 'stopovers', and this has been and should remain a benefit of the job. However, it is also the crew's (including FO's) responsibility to inform the aircraft commander of any shortfall in their rest requirements and any captain must take this into consideration before allowing their participation as one of his crew, especially when deciding to operate into allowable extensions of duty hours. It cannot, nor should it ever, be used against that crew member in disciplinary proceedings for circumstances outside their personal control.

I see that Litebulbs, as a nonflying, nonBA (self confessed) employee of another airline (therefore quite legitimately entitled to post on both forums), ignores responses to his oneliners.... or will this provoke a thoughtful response? I enjoy his input and welcome further.

I see you're still online...

it is so unfair of people to completely blame BA cabin crew for all it's woes
 

you forgot to add the 4-1 drubbing England got against Germany: you all have much to answer for:)

So you are implying that jetset lady has a lifestyle issue? What an absolutely great post it would have been, apart from the tiredness and sickness. Best posters learn to only supply examples that support the froth.

Another one liner
 

and............

You're comparing the life of cabin crew to working up a chimney? You don't think you're being a teensy bit melodramatic here?

That wasn't in question. As R Knee pointed out, it works both ways. It's your duty to declare that you are fit, well and rested when you sign in before every flight.
BA cabin crew are not unique and I'm sure they work just as hard on other airlines and are just as tired. The way I see it, if you can't cope, leave. Someone else will happily do your job, no point blaming BA again.

Tiramisu
 

Not a lot I can say to that.

Beer has froth - PIMMS doesn't
 

Thanks for the support Tiramasu and Pappi

It is always better if I'm posters fully read what is said in a post rather than picking their own limited selection.

The point is -


Crew should be aware they are ALLOWED to be tired &/or sick, but -

it is their legal responsibility to make the aircraft commander aware of any personal limitations as to their fitness to operate.

Is this not an important flight safety/CRM issue? You should not operate (or maintain) an aircraft when unfit for whatever reason. One's personal duty of care actually encompasses other crew members and passengers as any professional would understand.

That's unlike you Litebulbs.;)
We value your thoughts and contribution as a UNITE REP.

R Knee,
What you posted is factually correct and BA are extremely supportive to crew who are unfit to fly or are on long term sick. I assure you the Duty of Care is there. Also if someone knowingly comes to work when they are are sick or tired, they are jeopardising the health and safety of customers and colleague alike.

I don't believe Jetset lady was being unreasonable in her observations. We have all at times complained to individuals when experiencing a few days of "scramble".

She made overservations where she thought improvements could be made and expressed that hope that eventually Cabin Crew would have representation that would actually be able to negotiate on their behalf. Nothing I see that is unreasonable on its face.

Many is the time when an individual will say "I'm exhausted, will I make it through this day" when in reality they are embelishing just a bit to make a point.

I find the fact that there are issues that could be improved to be reasonable...in a large organization there are always procedures that can be improved.

I'm optomistic changes will occur that will make progress possible.

Betty girlI agree. The situation now, as in the past is nothing to do with the unions but all to do with the mgmt.

In years gone by, many unions rightly enabled their members to be better paid than in previous generations. Then, as human beings do, they pushed rather further. Many companies and governments allowed them to push further. Then came the time when they had pushed too far and so the pendulum started to swing back. In some companies it still is.

But, repeating myself, the mgmt of BA that messed it all up are long gone, bonus' paid and out of reach. I hope that some of them are thinking, "Phew, I got away with it." and know that they made a mess of it.

For the record and nay newcomers to this forum, I have never worked in the airline biz and have never held any shares in any airline biz.

CAA regulations??
 

Betty Girl,

You posted earlier some "rules" that you said came from the (UK) CAA in its regulation of cabin crew working time, in relation to long haul routes.

I think you will find that those "rules" that you quoted are not UK CAA rules for Cabin Crew. Those "rules" sound more like BA's own rules for CC, and might be derived from their rules for folk at the pointed end.

The only rule for CC that the CAA regulate is the implementation of the (daft) EU rule about block flying time for CC which was introduced sometime in 04/05. (The UK did not want those rules, they were put in place by the EU when UKREP, which represents the UK in EU dirty deals and negotiation, did not know what it was agreeing to. BA/Virgin et al had the opportunity to help inform UKREP, but did nothing. Nothing new there, then.)

Now, it is entirely possible that I am wrong, and if so, I would be delighted to be educated.

If those rules are CAA rules, would either you, or one of your colleagues, point me in the direction where I might find those UK CAA rules. I've looked at the CAA website and despite an exhaustive search, I can't find them.

Thats untrue. The CAA are the regulatory authority (partly subservient to EASA) in the UK, and its their regs that apply.

Try CAP371 - Avoidance of fatigue in aircrews, from which the BA scheme is derived.

CAP 371

Some of Betty girls assertions arent quite correct (time after arrival doesnt count for example) but the essential thrust is. Far East - London cannot be done legally without the cabin crew all getting 3 hrs in the bunks. Under CAA rules however this need not be consecutive, so if BA wanted to have a middle meal service, under CAA regs it could be done by splitting the breaks.

One outsider said:

But this is a discussion forum, not BA's complaint help line.

The subject matter is Pax and SLF's thoughts and questions on the BA Strike. If you don't like certain people's thoughts or questions, you can skip them and move on.

But I'm afraid if a pattern emerges of a certain group of cabin crew working, say, during a certain time, exhibiting a cheerful and happy demeanor, that means cheerful and happy (and returning) customers.

On the other hand, a bunch of sour-faced, lazy, miserable, look-like-they've-been-there-too-long cabin crew working at another time can put passengers off flying BA.

As a passenger, these things are important to me. The strike appears to have helped identify which group is which.

Ergo, I'd rather be spending my money getting looked after by the former than the latter.

Ironically, it's usually only people from the latter group that complain that passengers don't know enough to comment or should have no business doing so. They probably throw away comment cards that are critical of their service.

The former are very happy to listen to praise or justifiable criticism and learn from it - although in fairness they probably rarely receive criticism. Unlike the latter, who act as if pax are a massive inconvenience to their jollies.

Those are my thoughts, on the PPrune Pax & SLF discussion forum on BA strike - thoughts and questions.

Ayethangyou.

ChicoG

Exactly what I wanted to say but put much better.

:ok:

Hotel Mode,
thank you for that. I did look hard in the CAA web-site, found cap 371, but did not get as far as section c, annexe a, page 15, as my very faulty memory had associated cap 371 with those from the pointed end only.
thanks
AO

ChicoG
 

I think you have hit the nail on the head with regard to the customer/passenger. Many on these threads have dismissed the CC role as an overpaid trolly dolly role that anyone working at Tesco's could do. But what about their 'worth'.

As a frequent flyer (silver) the CC are, for me, the main factor in determining whether I have an enjoyable or an unjoyable flight, (I use on-line check in and rarely use the IFE) - other than freezing cold red wine, but that's another story.

I think this is where WW faces his biggest challenge in bringing deserted pax back to BA - a happy CC worforce will be central to this.

bizdev

There are two sides to that coin. Many on other forums (than PPrune) have paid scant regard to how their actions on and off the aircraft affect passengers, which affects future bookings, and thus their livelihood.

Thanks Hotel mode. Yes I think you are right it should be chocks not 30 mins after chocks, my mistake, I apologise for that but of course that makes no difference to the rest requirement on the Hong Kong flights.

And yes you are right it can be broken up (but you will notice that I did not say it had to be in one block).This is however not done because with the added extra changeover times from one half of the crew to the other this would actually take up more time when crew could not be used to do the services onboard.

As I explained a mid flight meal could be done in between the two sets of cabin crew breaks but as I said, even on a day flight alot of passengers prefer to sleep and don't want to be woken up halfway through the flight and as I also said, there is only enough catering space for two meals.

However I have heard of a Capetown day sector where the CSD did actually serve the second meal between the two cabin crew breaks because the first meal that had been served was a small snack and all the passengers were very hungry. That was of course a decision he took on the day, it was not the way BA had laid down that it be done.

My post was, though, in reply to a poster who was insisting that the crew rest was a union agreement and was the cause of no food mid flight. I was explaining that the breaks were a CAA requirement and taken in the middle of the flight because that is the way BA wants it, nothing to do with the union. So that is why I went into so much detail but even with all that detail people still choose to rubbish it.

Thanks though for confirming that cabin crew legaly require rest in flight as well as pilots. Many people just think of us as waiters and waitreses but of course as well as that we have to be rested enough to conduct an evacuation if required etc.etc.

Many thanks

Ancient Observer.

I can't help noticing that you said thank you to Hotel Mode for setting you straight but you never said sorry to me for telling me I was incorrect.

Just an observation.

I have just removed this post below from the special slot where only those who work for airlines are allowed to post. I suppose it's not good just having my own airline because I'll just be told I don't work because I am the boss. Anyway, before any further ructions occur, here is an article from today's FT. Apparently this article is readable by subscription only?

For those who do not want to register.....

BA board faces volley of attacks at AGM
By Pilita Clark, Aerospace Correspondent

Published: July 13 2010 11:07 | Last updated: July 13 2010 20:54

Willie Walsh was jeered, heckled and booed over his handling of the British Airways cabin crew dispute at what could be the last annual meeting of the airline in its current form.

The BA chief executive, and at times the airline’s entire board, endured a volley of attacks by shareholders, many employees, at the Queen Elizabeth II conference centre in Westminster over the strikes that have cost lossmaking BA close to £150m since March.

“Nobody has the guts to question you,” one female flight attendant told Mr Walsh, adding “there’s nothing but fear and loathing” at BA’s headquarters near Heathrow.

A stony faced Mr Walsh, who noted some cabin crew had depicted him “as Hitler or as the Devil” during the walk-outs, said he made no apologies for telling them facts they may not wish to hear, prompting the flight attendant to retort icily: “I’m not a child Mr Walsh.”

It was the first time Mr Walsh had to confront his cabin crew employees publicly since they began voting for a series of stoppages late last year.

Although BA has had to cope with the losses and the bad publicity, it has already done what it set out to do.
While the row was originally sparked by what Unite said was the imposition of crew reductions on long-haul flights, it has since shifted to the staff travel benefits BA removed from striking workers this year and has said will only partially restore. The crew reductions are no longer central to the dispute.

Nevertheless, strikes are still on the agenda. Crew are now voting in a fresh ballot that could lead to further strikes in late summer, depending on the results, due on July 20.

BA has been backed by its largest shareholders and much of the City. Analysts generally look beyond the unrest to annual savings of some £160m BA says it will eventually make after cutting crew numbers on long- haul flights and recruiting cheaper new crew at its main base of Heathrow.

Airlines around the world have suffered industrial unrest as many struggle with large losses during the recession.

Perk concern
Cabin crew were not the only outspoken critics at BA’s annual meeting, writes Pilita Clark.

Some shareholders expressed dismay at the prospect of losing their own travel benefits and seeing future AGMs shift to Madrid if the airline’s merger with Spain’s Iberia goes ahead.

“Why the hell are we going to Madrid?” one investor asked BA board members. ”It’s clear where BA is and here we should stay. If you want to go and have your jollies over there, go, but leave us here!”

Under the terms of the proposed tie-up, future AGMs of the combined group and most board meetings would be in Madrid.

Another shareholder asked what would happen to the 10 per cent discount on publicly advertised fares, that BA shareholders can now claim, if the Iberia merger was completed as planned by the end of this year.

Martin Broughton, chairman, said shareholders would have a chance to vote on the merger later in the year, adding that BA was looking into broadcasting Madrid AGMs by video so UK investors could take part.

Shareholder travel benefits, which Iberia investors do not enjoy, would be up to the new board. “We will be seeking to continue a shareholder discount but I can’t give you any guarantees on it.”

Such feisty AGM scenes will not be repeated at next year’s meeting – at least, not in London – if BA’s attempt to merge with Iberia, the Spanish flag-carrier, is completed as planned by the end of this year.

The newly combined company, to be known as International Airlines Group, will be registered in Madrid and hold most of its board meetings and all shareholder meetings in the Spanish capital.

Mr Walsh will become IAG’s chief executive if the merger goes through, leaving Keith Williams, BA’s current finance director, to run a BA operating company and deal with any remnants of the bitterly fought cabin crew strike.

While many of the most critical speakers and hecklers at Tuesday’s AGM were airline cabin crew or in one case, a 777 pilot, others said they were ordinary shareholders who were, as one put it, “very saddened by the cabin crew situation”, which has seen 22 days of stoppages and thousands of cancelled flights since March.

“I just feel this situation has created long-term damage to the brand,” said one man who described himself as a “shareholder and Executive Club member”.

Another man was cheered as he accused the board of awarding generous bonuses to top managers even though BA has failed to pay a dividend after making record pre-tax losses of nearly £1bn over the past two years.

“You do seem to be feathering your own nests at the expense of the shareholders you are supposed to serve,’’ he said.

An at times exasperated BA chairman Martin Broughton defended the bonuses and said the BA board “stands firmly behind Willie and the management team”.

“The board’s patience with BASSA has now been exhausted,” Mr Broughton warned, referring to the British Airlines Stewards and Stewardesses Association, a division of Unite.

“Willie is often depicted by BASSA and Unite as adopting a confrontational approach to industrial relations,” he said, adding that Mr Walsh had successfully negotiated new work practises with 16 separate union bargaining groups across the business.

But it was Mr Walsh – who has himself not taken a bonus and worked for no salary for a month last year – who suffered the most strident attacks.

One speaker accused him of allowing BA staff who could not swim and were “unable to fasten their seat belts” to apply to be volunteer cabin crew as part of the airline’s strategy of flying through the strikes. Mr Walsh said only Civil Aviation Authority-approved volunteers had been allowed to work.

Another accused him of ignoring BASSA’s offer ahead of the strikes to make at least £52m in savings. Mr Walsh said BASSA made clear the offer was more a temporary “loan” that in no way matched the permanent structural changes BA needs.

Afterwards, he told reporters, “I really enjoyed it”, adding “it gave me the opportunity to address a lot of issues”.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see BA cease to exist in its present form fairly soon and to be taken off shore entirely. WW's just got to sort out the pension fund and then, once the airline is in Madrid, he'll be able to staff it entirely using people from South and Central America, with the exception of Brasil of course, using the favoured nation status that Spain offers to its former overseas colonies which will allow him to circumvent EEC labour protection laws.

Hang on a second, R Knee. I wasn't complaining, although I did jokingly apologise for my whinge fest! I was asked if the rostering practices at LGW provide any benefits to the company. My answer was that in my opinion, whilst they may short term, long term could be a different matter. Now, this lifestyle thing you talk about. What's one of those then? ;)


Yes, it is the responsibility of the crew to maximise the rest but that's not always as easy as it sounds. This is the week I am currently halfway through...

Fri - Report 1650 LGW-XXX-LGW
Sat - Clear LGW 0025 Report 2105 LGW-XXX-LGW
Sun - Clear LGW 0720
Mon - Day Off
Tues - Report 0605 LGW-XXX-LGW-XXX Clear 1310
Wed - Report 0520 XXX-LGW-XXX-LGW Clear 1315
Thu - Report 1355 LGW-XXX-LGW-XXX Clear 2225
Fri - Report 1510 XXX-LGW-XXX-LGW Clear 0045

(Tues and Thur were/are out station nightstops and I have taken out the destinations to try to protect my identity somewhat)

That roster is perfectly legal but I have gone from 2 deep night flights, had one day off and then straight onto early flights. And before this, I'd had 2 days off following 3 days of shorthaul and a bullet longhaul so a 6 day run and time zone change. Maximising your rest isn't easy when you're constantly jumping around like that.

That is the problem we have at LGW. The above is not an abnormal roster and yes, it can be sustained in the short term but long term, we are running into problems.

I don't actually blame the company, although I think more research could have been carried out at the start. As I said, my previous airline had had many years of practice to hone mixed fleet rosters. (Is hone a word? Sounds right but looks wrong and my brain won't come up with an alternative!) I suspect the messages we have been passing on to the union have not made it as far is the ears that matter, due to union leader's preoccupation with what is happening up at LHR. (The LGW reps have tried, to give them their due but have had no back up from the union.) That is why we need proper representation to talk with the company. But as Diplome said, right now BA have more important problems to deal with. Once things have settled, we will be able to talk to them and hopefully come up with some compromises.

The difficulty with making it clear to the Captain etc is that as said, it's all perfectly legal. There's nothing the flight crew can do unless we decide to go fatigued at which point the company will reply, "But it's legal!" And that goes for any airline, not just BA. I'm sure many flying crew from many airlines around the world have heard those words! Just because it's legal, it doesn't make it right. Maybe the laws need looking at. And maybe all airlines need to be reminded that that maximum allowable hours are there for safety reasons, not as a target to be reached.....

However, for the record, I have never operated a flight if I have felt I will be putting crew and passengers at risk.

Hi JetSet Lady.

That is a hard roster. I do alot of two day six sectors as well at LHR but I try not to bid to do two in a row!!!! ( having said that I did two in a row last week and it nearly killed me!). God knows how you managed that after two night flights in a row. You poor thing!

We only have a few night flights at LHR and strangely some crew actually like doing them and actually bid for them!!!If I get one it is straight on the swap forum in the vain hope that someone might want to swop with me!

Do you have a bidding system at LGW like we do on Eurofleet?
Anyway if that is a normal roster I am not surprised that you are exausted.

Jet set lady.

To Hone is indeed a word in the English language and it's a very useful one.
'Don't you even think of honing your seduction skills on me!' is a phrase you might want to memorise. Of course you might prefer to modify matters somewhat and invite the honing of all sorts of skills.
The word, which you used quite correctly, is a transitive verb and means: to sharpen or to whet. It is usually applied to razors, sickles or scythes but could equally well go with thighs.
I once did six weeks on the trot of earlies. Once you get that far down the line and this was before edition 4 of CAP 371, it then became an acclimatised roster pattern. Sunk I was and when I complained I was told that the Chief Pilot was the man who had written the then applicable CAP371 for the CAA.

Just so every one is aware the paragraph at the bottom of Cavortincheetah's post are his thoughts not thoes of the FT.

Betty girl,

That's a pretty average roster for us. Not the best certainly, but not unusual. I don't actually mind night flights but it's the mixing of earlies and lates that is hard! Add long haul into the pot and it all takes it's toll.

We do have the same Carmen system at LGW but I'm convinced that Carmen is in fact, an old bitter and twisted CSD that was retired for the safety of all on board. As far as I can tell, she operates the same method used for football match draws, picking balls out of the crew and destination machines. "No 15 - JSL, No 238 - Izmir. JSL will go to Izmir" ;)

If only I needed to! :{

But thank-you for confirming I had the correct word and I shall remember to check who wrote the rules before I complain in future!

In the meantime, I need to go and research this Iberia merger in more detail. I don't know enough about it but from the little I do know and looking through the report of the AGM, it scares me more than anything we have been through so far. When will BASSA realise that by not seeing the wood for the trees, they are merely hastening along the end of British Airways!

Betty Girl

I think that is usually how one would interpret a lot of dashed lines at the end of an newspaper article which had been quoted as an inclusion. That usually suffices to signify the end of any quoted script. The words that follow on from there are obviously not connected with the article. And WW is mentioned in the third person so the wording could hardly have even been construed as being his own words.
I am really not surprised that letters from BA and perhaps BASSA have been misinterpreted or misconstrued if my simple offering can give rise to such misapprehension.

Result of latest ballot
 

Could someone please remind me when the result is due.

Thanks:ok:

I don't think you have too much to worry about the Iberia merger. But yes, BASSA should be briefing its members on what is the one of the most significant deals in the history of the airline.

In order to keep their respective rights to routes, the two will remain as separately operated and managed businesses. As they already co-operate on routes to Spain, I can't see much in terms of switching routes and crews between the two airlines.

Overall it is a positive move for the business to help it grow and be profitable. As is anti-trust immunity for AA, BA and Iberia on transatlantic routes.

There will be a lot more codeshares, but this will be so each airline has the marketing clout/profile of the other to help drive traffic into each other's networks.

I would think the first target will savings by sharing "back-office" functions such as IT, procurement etc.

Bucksbird

20th July.

cavortingcheetah

You will then be surprised to know that Douglas Bader had a hand in too while he was working for Shell!

PPRune Pop

How good to hear your voice again! Hope you and yours are well and thriving!
I am totally surprised to hear that Bader was involved. In fact and coincidence I have just been reading a badly type written report of one of his missions which has just been released under some secrecy act. I think he says he had a pot at a Dornier which will give you a clue as to the ID of the now deceased Chief Pilot of whom I spoke earlier.
Keep well.
cc.

Drifting back to the subject, I'm very reliably informedc that there have been a number of confirmed sabotage attempts by some cabin crew, I assume in failed attemps to delay flights.
So the BASSA comments regarding disclipary action mentioned in the CC thread are, shall we say, rather underplaying the truth.
(this is not including at least on criminal action that is in progress either)

I have been lurking on these threads for the last six months but have not posted, During and immediately after the last strike period I flew two long haul segments in F and two 4 hour segments in CE. While I found the service on these segments quite good, if somewhat robotic, this has not always been the case in recent years. If anything I think “inconsistent” best describes BA cabin service. As a result of my experiences and the comments on these threads I believe the best long term outcome of the current vote is for Bassa to reject the offer and subsequently vote too have another strike. Assuming Bassa then commence a strike BA’s hand will be forced and I believe they will have to take the gloves off and terminate strikers. Short of replacing the employees that have exhibited the behavior we have seen in the last year I do not see how BA can run a competitive operation.

From another AGM report:

Another interesting take on it here:

Verbal slugfest at British Airways AGM - interactive investor


What happened to the votes at the end of the meeting, or was that just last year?

Apology
 

Betty Girl,

Yup, sorry about that. You were right about CAP 371 applying and I was wrong.
I had no deliberate intention to mislead, I simply believed, wrongly, that it only applied to those at the pointy end.

Aplogies

AO

All shareholders at the AGM ( this year and previous years) vote with an hand held gizmo.

The results, we are told , will be published on the BA website
British Airways - Investor Relations - Private Shareholders Home
details
http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External...xUeXBlPTM=&t=1

Thanks Ancient Observer.

BA/Iberia merger receives EU approval:

BA moves step closer to transatlantic deal with American Airlines and Iberia | Business | The Guardian

British Airways' three-way alliance cleared for takeoff | Mail Online

There are, at this moment, no major hurdles viewed in getting U.S. approval though I wonder what effect this will have on BA based Cabin Crew, etc.?

I've still much more reading to do regarding the merger before I'm going to feel well-informed though most analysts seem to view it as a very good thing for BA.

If you want to know how badly BA needs this merger, consider Air France/KLM/Alitalia and the Lufthansa Group (Swiss, Austrian, Brussels Airlines, bmi – and effective control of SAS and others through Star). Iberia could jump into either of those camps and BA would then be completely isolated and marginalised.

I personally have been told by very senior people at BA haw amazed they were at the success of AF/KL, having been very sceptical about how two such different corporate cultures could be brought together.

I just wonder whether a BA a couple of years down the line, with its cost base sorted and decent profits coming in, would not have been a rather more senior partner in the merged entity.