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