Airline operating illegally
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: EGKK
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bealzebub,
What do you think about the 2 posts above ?
I understand your point of view, but I can guarantee that most captains in the industry would rather follow a order issued by their ops dept (even if it goes against certain rules) than risk to loose their jobs... And this was exactly what I was referring too. Although I highly respect your attitude and your point of view, and only wish their were more Capts. who shared your point of view.
What do you think about the 2 posts above ?
I understand your point of view, but I can guarantee that most captains in the industry would rather follow a order issued by their ops dept (even if it goes against certain rules) than risk to loose their jobs... And this was exactly what I was referring too. Although I highly respect your attitude and your point of view, and only wish their were more Capts. who shared your point of view.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do I think of the two posts ? Well I think it is bad. I don't doubt there are unscupulous operators in the world, and that people are unfairly subject to the whims of such operators. I haven't responded to those posts because I am not sure I can contribute anything other than interest. I did however respond to your post which specifically dealt with flight time issues, exploitation, and captains authority ( or lack of it). Those where the issues that you specifically raised and I specifically addressed. These are matters affecting CAA regulated UK carriers. I also asked you what you were referring to before replying to the points.
I have tried to reply accurately to your points in the order you have raised them. I have to say that some of what you say has merit, but clearly some of the more sweeping statements are seemingly borne out of a lack of actual appreciation of the regulations as they stand. Obviously it is up to you to accept or refute what I say as you see fit. Nevertheless it is ridiculous to say that Captains would follow "orders"and break rules rather than lose their jobs. This is patent nonsense on a number of levels, and whatever you may think it is not the norm. I can assure you that if I fly knowingly outside the MEL or any part of the operations manual my employer and the CAA would take a very dim view of it. That may not be the case in all parts of the world, nor even in all parts of the industry. However your assertions are frankly not accurate in general. They are your viewpoint, but with respect that doesn't make them "fact".
I have tried to reply accurately to your points in the order you have raised them. I have to say that some of what you say has merit, but clearly some of the more sweeping statements are seemingly borne out of a lack of actual appreciation of the regulations as they stand. Obviously it is up to you to accept or refute what I say as you see fit. Nevertheless it is ridiculous to say that Captains would follow "orders"and break rules rather than lose their jobs. This is patent nonsense on a number of levels, and whatever you may think it is not the norm. I can assure you that if I fly knowingly outside the MEL or any part of the operations manual my employer and the CAA would take a very dim view of it. That may not be the case in all parts of the world, nor even in all parts of the industry. However your assertions are frankly not accurate in general. They are your viewpoint, but with respect that doesn't make them "fact".
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nevertheless it is ridiculous to say that Captains would follow "orders"and break rules rather than lose their jobs. This is patent nonsense on a number of levels, and whatever you may think it is not the norm.
Breaking rules is a strange and complex issue and I agree it is not the norm,but it certainly happens on a regular basis.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: LPL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately there are incidences of UK airlines putting pressure on crews to operate "outside" the the CAP's, MEL's and Ops manuals.
These are however very serious allegations and you must be totally sure of your facts and have plenty of evidence before doing anything about it.
You can be sure that reporting anything like this would get very ugly, very fast, but to be honest it is the right thing to do. However hard and risky.
With regard to FTL's, there is not really any excuse for not knowing them and implementing them correctly. That is our responsibility as crew, yes crewing and ops should understand them, but at the end of the day it is up to us to comply.
Most people are reasonable and will do all they can to "help out" in times of trouble, but I think this thread is more about being expected to push the boundries on a daily basis. For example according to my reading of CAP 371, if you know you will be going into discretion before you start the final sector on STD times, then discretion isn't really open for your use. Therefore to fit within CAP 371 you must NOT operate that sector.
I stress that this is my interpretation, but nobdy has been able to convince me differently, including our Ops dept.
These are however very serious allegations and you must be totally sure of your facts and have plenty of evidence before doing anything about it.
You can be sure that reporting anything like this would get very ugly, very fast, but to be honest it is the right thing to do. However hard and risky.
With regard to FTL's, there is not really any excuse for not knowing them and implementing them correctly. That is our responsibility as crew, yes crewing and ops should understand them, but at the end of the day it is up to us to comply.
Most people are reasonable and will do all they can to "help out" in times of trouble, but I think this thread is more about being expected to push the boundries on a daily basis. For example according to my reading of CAP 371, if you know you will be going into discretion before you start the final sector on STD times, then discretion isn't really open for your use. Therefore to fit within CAP 371 you must NOT operate that sector.
I stress that this is my interpretation, but nobdy has been able to convince me differently, including our Ops dept.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is CAP 371 . It is the Civil Aviation authority publication that provides the framework for each companys CAA approved FTL scheme. Page 12 section 18 is the reference for Captains Discretion to extend a flying duty period.
I cannot see that there is a great deal to interpret here. It clearly states that :
An aircraft commander may at his discretion and after taking note of the circumstances of other members of the crew, extend an FDP beyond that permitted in section 13.3 provided he is satisfied that the flight can be made safely. The extension shall be calculated according to what actually happens, not on what was planned to happen. An extension of 3 hours is the maximum permitted, except in cases of emergency.
A commander is authorised to excercise his discretion in the following circumstances and to the limits set. In a flying duty period involving 2 or more sectors, up to a maximum of 2 hours may be excercised prior to the first and subsequent sectors, but this may be up to 3 hours prior to the start of a single sector flight, or immediately prior to the last sector of a multi sector flight.
I cannot see the ambiguity myself. The final decision rests with the Captain. The company cannot roster a flight that is clearly going to require discretion at the planning stage, but it is acceptable, albeit not compulsory, for a flight to depart knowing that discretion will be needed prior to the first, last or any sector in between up to the limits specified. Which part of the CAP 371 are you saying would not allow for this ? In any event as the Captain it is always your final decision.
I agree there are indeed many instances of pressure being applied to Captains to operate( not always obviously ) outside of the rules and regulations. If and when this happens it is of course the duty of the Captain to act as final judge and decide accordingly. That is in part why we are appointed to the rank, and a large part of what we are paid for. Staying with the judge analogy for a moment. In a courtroom the advocates also apply pressure to the judge to make a decision which satisfies their ( or their clients) agenda. Not of all of that pressure will have merit or be correct necessarily, but it still requires the Judge or Captain ( if you will) to be the final arbiter.
In this industry as in many others, there are serious commercial pressures, and resulting from those, the pressure applied to individuals is often going to vary in its intensity and accuracy. I totally accept that there may be occaisions when an individual has pressure applied to them to go against their best judgement. Whatever form that takes and however the individual reacts is always going to be a result of the realities and perception of risk at the time. But at the end of the day you are the Captain ( for those that are), and the buck stops with you as far as any individual flight is concerned.
I cannot see that there is a great deal to interpret here. It clearly states that :
An aircraft commander may at his discretion and after taking note of the circumstances of other members of the crew, extend an FDP beyond that permitted in section 13.3 provided he is satisfied that the flight can be made safely. The extension shall be calculated according to what actually happens, not on what was planned to happen. An extension of 3 hours is the maximum permitted, except in cases of emergency.
A commander is authorised to excercise his discretion in the following circumstances and to the limits set. In a flying duty period involving 2 or more sectors, up to a maximum of 2 hours may be excercised prior to the first and subsequent sectors, but this may be up to 3 hours prior to the start of a single sector flight, or immediately prior to the last sector of a multi sector flight.
I cannot see the ambiguity myself. The final decision rests with the Captain. The company cannot roster a flight that is clearly going to require discretion at the planning stage, but it is acceptable, albeit not compulsory, for a flight to depart knowing that discretion will be needed prior to the first, last or any sector in between up to the limits specified. Which part of the CAP 371 are you saying would not allow for this ? In any event as the Captain it is always your final decision.
I agree there are indeed many instances of pressure being applied to Captains to operate( not always obviously ) outside of the rules and regulations. If and when this happens it is of course the duty of the Captain to act as final judge and decide accordingly. That is in part why we are appointed to the rank, and a large part of what we are paid for. Staying with the judge analogy for a moment. In a courtroom the advocates also apply pressure to the judge to make a decision which satisfies their ( or their clients) agenda. Not of all of that pressure will have merit or be correct necessarily, but it still requires the Judge or Captain ( if you will) to be the final arbiter.
In this industry as in many others, there are serious commercial pressures, and resulting from those, the pressure applied to individuals is often going to vary in its intensity and accuracy. I totally accept that there may be occaisions when an individual has pressure applied to them to go against their best judgement. Whatever form that takes and however the individual reacts is always going to be a result of the realities and perception of risk at the time. But at the end of the day you are the Captain ( for those that are), and the buck stops with you as far as any individual flight is concerned.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: LPL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately many companies do roster it so tight, that you know that discretion will have to be excercised when you get your roster, let alone on the day. In my case the company knows how long flights will actually take, but often ignore the reality and stick to unrealistic STD's.
We have many flights that are rostered to the minute of the FDP limits. As we all know it is rare for everything to go right and even when there are no problems rarely do you even get close, but why do companies insist on running so close to the wind?
It leaves them open to lots of problems, from captains not wishing to exercise discretion due to real tiredness, or somebody who wants to make a point. The only people who suffer are the customers and the airline itself. It doesn't look good if people constantly refuse discretion, but it is their right.
Personally, I don't normally mind using it as long as everyone else is o.k about it (whilst I'll take the responsibility for the decision, if my F/O is not comfortable or not able, then no matter how I feel it's a no go), it is not a given however that this is the case, but I baulk at agreeing to simply cover poor rostering practises. Which is the crux of the matter here.
Often this means that you have to take a stand for this to be noticed and acted upon, this leaves you open to all sorts of criticism and potential attack depending on your company attitude.
We have many flights that are rostered to the minute of the FDP limits. As we all know it is rare for everything to go right and even when there are no problems rarely do you even get close, but why do companies insist on running so close to the wind?
It leaves them open to lots of problems, from captains not wishing to exercise discretion due to real tiredness, or somebody who wants to make a point. The only people who suffer are the customers and the airline itself. It doesn't look good if people constantly refuse discretion, but it is their right.
Personally, I don't normally mind using it as long as everyone else is o.k about it (whilst I'll take the responsibility for the decision, if my F/O is not comfortable or not able, then no matter how I feel it's a no go), it is not a given however that this is the case, but I baulk at agreeing to simply cover poor rostering practises. Which is the crux of the matter here.
Often this means that you have to take a stand for this to be noticed and acted upon, this leaves you open to all sorts of criticism and potential attack depending on your company attitude.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes ML I agree with you. I don't know why they do it, but assume it is for commercial expediancy. I also agree with your observations on discretion. I think the difficulty arises though when anyone takes a stand to make a point. Obviously that is their right, but of course it is open to question. As I stated in a previous post, you are the Captain and the decision is yours. Of course if that decision is erroneous then it doesn't indemnify the Captain from having to account for it. I would also suspect that if one is going to make a point, it might well be reciprocated at some later date when an equally rigid response is less than desirable. However that is again a matter for the individual. Only the individual can apply common sense and measure their own level of stance, be it resistance or co-operation.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Problem being no one stand behind the crew.
Too many folks from failed airlines, Ansett, Emery some ex Eastern to include many others.
You notify your Crew Leasing agent such as D. P. out of Ireland an are told not to ever operate this way by them ever.
Yet they see the pay records, over duty days, 120 block hours in a 20 day period and they wont help with the problem.
All though they pay you as over duty, even after you complain.
Then when you finally have enough after many repeated letters you talk the walk, this is wrong you cannot do this any longer.
You go home on unpaid days off, 10 days etc after 3 months on base, you get the non contract renewal.
They know you operated illegally as you have complainied in writing many times.
They even agreed with you, then no job.
I think we all know this company that is being discussed here.
This from a long time employee that had enough.
Question is?
Would you work for this Icelandic company?
Would you work for the crew leasing agent that does not honor its contract obligations, such as operating by the JAR regulations.
If you took the walk off the aircraft after many complaints, duty times, MEL non observance etc.
Even the crew leasing agent asking you not to contact the CAA.
Would not want my family on this aircraft.
Any pilot that operates this way is only asking for trouble and is not correct in any way..
Shortaqge of crew and no parts not my problem, this excuse is invalid, heard too many times.
Too many folks from failed airlines, Ansett, Emery some ex Eastern to include many others.
You notify your Crew Leasing agent such as D. P. out of Ireland an are told not to ever operate this way by them ever.
Yet they see the pay records, over duty days, 120 block hours in a 20 day period and they wont help with the problem.
All though they pay you as over duty, even after you complain.
Then when you finally have enough after many repeated letters you talk the walk, this is wrong you cannot do this any longer.
You go home on unpaid days off, 10 days etc after 3 months on base, you get the non contract renewal.
They know you operated illegally as you have complainied in writing many times.
They even agreed with you, then no job.
I think we all know this company that is being discussed here.
This from a long time employee that had enough.
Question is?
Would you work for this Icelandic company?
Would you work for the crew leasing agent that does not honor its contract obligations, such as operating by the JAR regulations.
If you took the walk off the aircraft after many complaints, duty times, MEL non observance etc.
Even the crew leasing agent asking you not to contact the CAA.
Would not want my family on this aircraft.
Any pilot that operates this way is only asking for trouble and is not correct in any way..
Shortaqge of crew and no parts not my problem, this excuse is invalid, heard too many times.
Last edited by 2Bad2Sad; 15th Feb 2005 at 12:49.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML -
- bearing in mind that FDP finishes on chocks, is this true - or are you being rostered 'to the FDP minute' at chocks + 30? There is a difference, and I believe that the CAA expect airlines to allow this buffer? A lot of people in my experience have whined about being rostered 'out-of-FDP' but have not allowed for those 30 minutes. Any CAA 'regulated' (note the apostrophes!) airline that has an excessive 'regular' amount of discretion being exercised (normally more than 30% on a particular trip pattern) will, I'm sure, be looked at if the CAA are told. That is most definitely an abuse of the system.
We have many flights that are rostered to the minute of the FDP limits.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: LPL
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BOAC, yes it is based solely on FDP and yes we do have the CAA breathing down our necks about the amount of discretion being used, unfortunately some of my colleagues are not filling in the forms as they should and large amounts of discretion are going unreported. Very daft.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Contact the CAA without fail as others on here have said LGW for the below except the licensing but they will contact the London office
Big issue are the hull insurance, the licesensing issues and safety regulations - pax and crew are at risk
If you have any info please pass it on ASAP
But you will need details so the CAA can look into it properly
TnT
Big issue are the hull insurance, the licesensing issues and safety regulations - pax and crew are at risk
If you have any info please pass it on ASAP
But you will need details so the CAA can look into it properly
TnT
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
unfortunately some of my colleagues are not filling in the forms as they should and large amounts of discretion are going unreported
CHIRP will, I'm sure, help you.
BTW All: PLEASE let's not open this into a slanging match on CHIRP.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: S.E England
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
unfortunately some of my colleagues are not filling in the forms as they should and large amounts of discretion are going unreported. Very daft.
Part of my procedures involve running a post flight violation report which highlights any violation of the company FTL scheme. It will show any FDP exceeded and I therefore will ensure that we have the corrosponding Discretion report which then goes through its own procedures.
I fail to see how an operator can prove to the authority they have robust controls and then manage to 'lose' discretion reports.
Maybe my procedures are too good if I cant get away with it.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: here and there
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
illegally
The situation I explained earlier was not with AAI but with another fairly big charter company operating into all European countries. Not to blame AAI - Donīt know much about them.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA
CAP 371 gives guidance to Operators and crew on the minimum FTL permissible.
Someone at the airline writes the company FTL scheme and submits to the Authority for approval; that is why every airline has a slightly different scheme.
If you contact the CAA about your company's FTL scheme you are more than likely to be told that ' the interpretation of their FTL scheme is left to the operator'
Someone at the airline writes the company FTL scheme and submits to the Authority for approval; that is why every airline has a slightly different scheme.
If you contact the CAA about your company's FTL scheme you are more than likely to be told that ' the interpretation of their FTL scheme is left to the operator'
