Ryanair & Positioning Pilots
I'm not a pilot - I'm an engineer. I frequently have to be at company sites other than my home base (as much as 300 miles away) and quite often have to travel to and from these sites outside normal working time. When I do I don't get paid for the extra time (or get time off in lieu), but the company either pays the mileage rate or provides a hire car (my choice). When travelling I am expected to abide by the company codes of conduct regardless of whether it is within normal working hours or not.
Why is it any different for pilots?
PDR
Why is it any different for pilots?
PDR
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What an interesting discussion, I don't work for FR but have to say I broke it down into captplaystations latest post observations also.
The commuting thing I see as each to their own, happens in probably most airlines, so long as done to achieve sensible rest period prior to operating don't see the excitement.
The airside ID thing and what channel to use, I can't get overly excited about it, who cares !
What does irk me though (for the FR guys) if I have understood correctly is that you have to travel in your own time to start a series of duties which is at a base other than your "on paper" home base, is that correct ? Then surely that is simply a duty requirement at the behest of your employer (whoever that may be) which therefore invalidates said day off as a day off for the purposes of ensuring adequate legal days off are provided ? I apologise if I have misinterpreted and this last paragraph is incorrect.
As I understand it every airline governed by EU regulations has a requirement to record any duty on behalf of the employer as duty (flight, positioning, standby etc etc) appropriately and failing to do so is failing to comply with FTL's.
If this is indeed happening can't all FR pilots simply file an MOR with the Relevant authority /chirp and escalating this to the point where an ops inspector for the relevant country/authority has to act ? (Or find a way to do this through a chosen body without name to avoid persecution ?)
Surely the goal would be that all positioning at the behest of the company becomes included in rostered "5 days on" period thus producing a win for the pilots and a win for the customers as the FR pilots are then being properly protected by the relevant EASA FTL's ? Providing a better lifestyle for pilots, more rested pilots for the operation and a requirement for more pilots as part of the "5 on" period is now taken by positioning time, thus driving the company to provide more crew at relevant bases (more opportunities for people to have the base they want) instead of paying people to position and stay in hotels ?
Hard hat on preparing for incoming. I don't see it as anyone trying to screw anyone, other than an employer who seems to have a unique interpretation of what constitutes a "duty" ? I apologise if FR do not actually expect people to position themselves to start a series of duties from anything other then their nominated home base in their rest periods/days off.
The commuting thing I see as each to their own, happens in probably most airlines, so long as done to achieve sensible rest period prior to operating don't see the excitement.
The airside ID thing and what channel to use, I can't get overly excited about it, who cares !
What does irk me though (for the FR guys) if I have understood correctly is that you have to travel in your own time to start a series of duties which is at a base other than your "on paper" home base, is that correct ? Then surely that is simply a duty requirement at the behest of your employer (whoever that may be) which therefore invalidates said day off as a day off for the purposes of ensuring adequate legal days off are provided ? I apologise if I have misinterpreted and this last paragraph is incorrect.
As I understand it every airline governed by EU regulations has a requirement to record any duty on behalf of the employer as duty (flight, positioning, standby etc etc) appropriately and failing to do so is failing to comply with FTL's.
If this is indeed happening can't all FR pilots simply file an MOR with the Relevant authority /chirp and escalating this to the point where an ops inspector for the relevant country/authority has to act ? (Or find a way to do this through a chosen body without name to avoid persecution ?)
Surely the goal would be that all positioning at the behest of the company becomes included in rostered "5 days on" period thus producing a win for the pilots and a win for the customers as the FR pilots are then being properly protected by the relevant EASA FTL's ? Providing a better lifestyle for pilots, more rested pilots for the operation and a requirement for more pilots as part of the "5 on" period is now taken by positioning time, thus driving the company to provide more crew at relevant bases (more opportunities for people to have the base they want) instead of paying people to position and stay in hotels ?
Hard hat on preparing for incoming. I don't see it as anyone trying to screw anyone, other than an employer who seems to have a unique interpretation of what constitutes a "duty" ? I apologise if FR do not actually expect people to position themselves to start a series of duties from anything other then their nominated home base in their rest periods/days off.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PDR, the difference is that there is a legal number of hours a pilot may fly as a crew member (flight hours) and be on duty (flying, standby, being positioned around country/world).
There are 7 day limits, 14. 28, monthly , yearly limits etc.
A bit like an HGV driver can only do so much before he/she must pull over for a rest of a minimum duration. Any HGV driver found to be driving with the tachometer disconnected gets in serious trouble. An employer bound by flight time limitations has a responsibility, as well as the crew member to jointly ensure these limits are not exceeded.
I think that was the question you were asking ?
There are 7 day limits, 14. 28, monthly , yearly limits etc.
A bit like an HGV driver can only do so much before he/she must pull over for a rest of a minimum duration. Any HGV driver found to be driving with the tachometer disconnected gets in serious trouble. An employer bound by flight time limitations has a responsibility, as well as the crew member to jointly ensure these limits are not exceeded.
I think that was the question you were asking ?
PDR
.. Because the law says so and as xollob has said it's all about the legal restrictions on pilot's working hours.
As a pilot in the employ of an airline you usually have a nominated home base (e.g. LGW). Getting between home and base is down to the individual ( and I think that's what most mean when they refer to "commuting"). The timing of that journey doesn't count as Duty time because it's construction (time of day, time of journey, means of travel) is down to the individual.
OTOH if you are at your designated home base and the employer decides to send you elsewhere to start a block of work (e.g. "we want you to go from LGW to CDG and operate out of there for a few days ) then that journey is usually regarded as "positioning" (or "dead heading" ), is organised by the airline and traditionally/legally it's regarded as part of your regulated duties and so the hours spent doing so count against legal limits - because it is being done solely at the behest of the operator.
I know it can sound like semantics, but the devil is in the detail - especially if the regulator(s) gets involved...
Why is it any different for pilots?
As a pilot in the employ of an airline you usually have a nominated home base (e.g. LGW). Getting between home and base is down to the individual ( and I think that's what most mean when they refer to "commuting"). The timing of that journey doesn't count as Duty time because it's construction (time of day, time of journey, means of travel) is down to the individual.
OTOH if you are at your designated home base and the employer decides to send you elsewhere to start a block of work (e.g. "we want you to go from LGW to CDG and operate out of there for a few days ) then that journey is usually regarded as "positioning" (or "dead heading" ), is organised by the airline and traditionally/legally it's regarded as part of your regulated duties and so the hours spent doing so count against legal limits - because it is being done solely at the behest of the operator.
I know it can sound like semantics, but the devil is in the detail - especially if the regulator(s) gets involved...
Last edited by wiggy; 12th Jan 2016 at 11:58.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
172 driver
"Maybe I missed something, but did you not leave out a fairly big group - the based contractors sent out of base? It's happening right now, every day of the week, somewhere around the network. Transporting themselves around the network, sometimes up to 3 flights, traveling for 14-15 hrs, coming in on a late wave arrival for an early wave departure as operating crew. Can't argue it's not at the behest of the company."
If that is the case, then I stand corrected on that front. I wasn't aware that "Based Contractors" were being rostered out of other bases with no provision for getting there provided by the company. In that case, I will agree with that point, as that is assuredly duty time, if it is something you have not agreed to do as part of your contract, and an additional burden the company is placing on you. So, yes, unless these guys have "agreed"
(maybe in preference to being laid off if their base is shrinking/seasonal ) to operate temporarily from another base, getting to & from the new location "should" be the companies responsibility, and "should" be recorded as duty time.
I know a few Bods based in GRO have to operate from BCN during the Winter months, I "assume" that is with some degree of consent on their part ? but it may be the "consent" has been given as the alternative offered was staying at home & earning diddly squat from Oct-Apr.
"Maybe I missed something, but did you not leave out a fairly big group - the based contractors sent out of base? It's happening right now, every day of the week, somewhere around the network. Transporting themselves around the network, sometimes up to 3 flights, traveling for 14-15 hrs, coming in on a late wave arrival for an early wave departure as operating crew. Can't argue it's not at the behest of the company."
If that is the case, then I stand corrected on that front. I wasn't aware that "Based Contractors" were being rostered out of other bases with no provision for getting there provided by the company. In that case, I will agree with that point, as that is assuredly duty time, if it is something you have not agreed to do as part of your contract, and an additional burden the company is placing on you. So, yes, unless these guys have "agreed"
(maybe in preference to being laid off if their base is shrinking/seasonal ) to operate temporarily from another base, getting to & from the new location "should" be the companies responsibility, and "should" be recorded as duty time. I know a few Bods based in GRO have to operate from BCN during the Winter months, I "assume" that is with some degree of consent on their part ? but it may be the "consent" has been given as the alternative offered was staying at home & earning diddly squat from Oct-Apr.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At Sports Direct recently, which is under investigation for employment abuses of contract workers, there was one topic discussed on the radio. It was a common practice for workers to be subjected to a 15mins security check after work, but after their shift had finished, and thus in their own time. It was at the behest of the company. When questioned the chief of the UK Institute of Directors said it was unacceptable to expect workers to carry out company requested duties for no pay. It had to be within duty time or within extended paid hours.
Do contractors get paid for ground duties outside base? Is the travelling time rostered as duty and logged? If so then positioning for out of base flights is no different.
Do contractors get paid for ground duties outside base? Is the travelling time rostered as duty and logged? If so then positioning for out of base flights is no different.
As I recall these contracts were introduced some 5-6 years ago and the carrot for being "unbased" was a pretty high salary for a loco with most if not almost all based on sector pay and on a self employed basis so no tax, welfare, pension, holidays, sick pay or anything else. In conversation with mates in the company it seems that sometimes you could be in the remote base for a week, sometimes only a day or two and then move to another during the working week necessitating a return from yet another place and change in hotac. All positioning hotac and transfers/transport were the contractor's own responsibility.
Imagine the amount of work involved (on days "off") not only planning the positioning flights but also arranging your own accommodation and working out transport from there to the airport and back every day!
This is why the rest of the industry was aghast at the idea - hardly surprisingly. Have I got the details about right, anyone?
Indeed, the "consent" was either change base with no doubt accom at your own expense or go several months on no pay.
Forget raising this with the IAA. They're a paper tiger (well, paper hamster) at best and anyway they sanctioned it in the first place so can't go back on that decision - and are so hand in glove with the company they'd do nothing to upset them.
You'd need to start a class action in the courts - and with no union because the company won't tolerate one the pilots are out on their own and just grateful to have a job, something widely believed likely to disappear if they cause any "trouble".
it's a
Imagine the amount of work involved (on days "off") not only planning the positioning flights but also arranging your own accommodation and working out transport from there to the airport and back every day!
This is why the rest of the industry was aghast at the idea - hardly surprisingly. Have I got the details about right, anyone?
I know a few Bods based in GRO have to operate from BCN during the Winter months, I "assume" that is with some degree of consent on their part ? but it may be the "consent" has been given as the alternative offered was staying at home & earning diddly squat from Oct-Apr.
Forget raising this with the IAA. They're a paper tiger (well, paper hamster) at best and anyway they sanctioned it in the first place so can't go back on that decision - and are so hand in glove with the company they'd do nothing to upset them.
You'd need to start a class action in the courts - and with no union because the company won't tolerate one the pilots are out on their own and just grateful to have a job, something widely believed likely to disappear if they cause any "trouble".
it's a
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Where the company needs me not where I want to be!
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An old Brookfield contract used to say something in the region of
The pilot is responsible for maintaining his own FTL’s in accordance with IAA regulations.
So that means you would have to inform Ryanair if your going over those by positioning as operating crew which is what you are classed as in uniform.
Also out of base work attracts or used to attract an extra €20 per block hour flying. That was to cover all travel expenses, Hotels Meals etc...... Read that as maybe buying a ticket.
Ops Part A states that you can travel as crew as long as you are available to act as crew if requested and is subject to FTL's
In a nut shell I see all this leans towards Ryanair will allow you to position etc and act as crew to save them booking your flight you can do it how you see fit to save fatigue and balance your life . But its on your head to inform them if your exceeding FTL's and not available to work. As the contractors are limited to 900 hours a year and they generally all want the 900 to pay for the loans and type rating no one is ringing up and saying "Hey I recon I am out of hours due jumpseating now" As the question would be raised why did you not use your €20psbh pay to buy a cheap ticket as thats what its for.
Stir the pot and it will probably mean a lot of guys lose out on seeing there families as much as they will have to stay in base on days off.
The pilot is responsible for maintaining his own FTL’s in accordance with IAA regulations.
So that means you would have to inform Ryanair if your going over those by positioning as operating crew which is what you are classed as in uniform.
Also out of base work attracts or used to attract an extra €20 per block hour flying. That was to cover all travel expenses, Hotels Meals etc...... Read that as maybe buying a ticket.
Ops Part A states that you can travel as crew as long as you are available to act as crew if requested and is subject to FTL's
In a nut shell I see all this leans towards Ryanair will allow you to position etc and act as crew to save them booking your flight you can do it how you see fit to save fatigue and balance your life . But its on your head to inform them if your exceeding FTL's and not available to work. As the contractors are limited to 900 hours a year and they generally all want the 900 to pay for the loans and type rating no one is ringing up and saying "Hey I recon I am out of hours due jumpseating now" As the question would be raised why did you not use your €20psbh pay to buy a cheap ticket as thats what its for.
Stir the pot and it will probably mean a lot of guys lose out on seeing there families as much as they will have to stay in base on days off.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The angle about using staff travel concessions being tax evasion is a complete red-herring in the UK. As all (ticketed) staff travel is sub-load it means that a seat is never guaranteed, therefore HMRC cannot nominate ST as a tangible 'benefit in kind' for taxation purposes.
Of course if travel is made available 'off the books' for pilots to position to their next duty on legally required days-off then who will be the wiser? You could even write into your Ops Man A that FTLs are entirely the responsibility of the pilot and nothing to do with the company....
When you operate an airline under an authority that exercises absolutely NO oversight it is quite amazing the things you can get away with!
Of course if travel is made available 'off the books' for pilots to position to their next duty on legally required days-off then who will be the wiser? You could even write into your Ops Man A that FTLs are entirely the responsibility of the pilot and nothing to do with the company....
When you operate an airline under an authority that exercises absolutely NO oversight it is quite amazing the things you can get away with!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: london
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that what applies to Ryanair should apply to the other big airline in the uk.They have many living in france who commute to work.From what i have seen many commute on the same day as their work day.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Or-E-Gun, USA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ryan is a Bit of a Strange Bird, No?
When the doors are closed and the engines are turning, a Non-Rev seat occupant is just that. Some are obviously commuters and some are otherwise. Cabin seats are more comfortable, but not always available. If one wants to get home - or to work - a jump seat will work. Some are eligible and others are not. Rules may vary a little between airlines and countries, but much less than one may expect. At the end of the day (or the workweek?), one is always better off flying with one's own company and, home company or not, one must absolutely know the rules. Why so much chatter in a very simple subject?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What does irk me though (for the FR guys) if I have understood correctly is that you have to travel in your own time to start a series of duties which is at a base other than your "on paper" home base, is that correct ? Then surely that is simply a duty requirement at the behest of your employer (whoever that may be) which therefore invalidates said day off as a day off for the purposes of ensuring adequate legal days off are provided ? I apologise if I have misinterpreted and this last paragraph is incorrect.
At Sports Direct recently, which is under investigation for employment abuses of contract workers, there was one topic discussed on the radio. It was a common practice for workers to be subjected to a 15mins security check after work, but after their shift had finished, and thus in their own time. It was at the behest of the company. When questioned the chief of the UK Institute of Directors said it was unacceptable to expect workers to carry out company requested duties for no pay. It had to be within duty time or within extended paid hours.
Do contractors get paid for ground duties outside base? Is the travelling time rostered as duty and logged? If so then positioning for out of base flights is no different.
Do contractors get paid for ground duties outside base? Is the travelling time rostered as duty and logged? If so then positioning for out of base flights is no different.
On the other hand take an airline pilot paid per-flying-hour and they're going to be earning a lot more than NMW per flying hour.
That'll probably still be a fair bit more than NMW when you factor in unpaid duty such as pre-flight brief, turnarounds, debrief, unpaid positioning etc
Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with it at all, but I think there is a big legal difference between the two cases.
Why so much chatter in a very simple subject?
..because people are arguing about what it means to be "on duty" in at least three different contexts...
1)Airside security
2)Employee Ts and Cs
3)Taxable benefits
...each of which can legitimately have a different definition of the term.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Why so much chatter in a very simple subject?
..because people are arguing about what it means to be "on duty" in at least three different contexts...
1)Airside security
2)Employee Ts and Cs
3)Taxable benefits
...each of which can legitimately have a different definition of the term.
Why so much chatter in a very simple subject?
..because people are arguing about what it means to be "on duty" in at least three different contexts...
1)Airside security
2)Employee Ts and Cs
3)Taxable benefits
...each of which can legitimately have a different definition of the term.
The main issue about being 'on duty' is that it is at the behest of the employer. As such, it must be recorded for FTL purposes. If you are on duty, you can be required to be in uniform, you can use your ID to access the secure area, you can travel as supernumary crew. Not a problem!
If you are off duty, you cannot be required to be in uniform, you have no business using your ID to access the secure area of an airport without a ticket, and you most definitely can never be described as supernumary CREW! ( The clue's in the name!) Being 'off' duty does not accrue FTL restrictions.
So midnight cruiser, and sunbird123, the pilots to whom you refer (working for an airline with a healthier regard to the law?) are no more, nor less than ticketed passengers, travelling on public transport. The fact they are also pilots is utterly irrelevant! For all the reasons I have quoted, they are off duty!
Why can't anyone answer the very simple question I have posed?
Are these FR pilots, who are travelling in uniform, using their ID to access the airport secure area, and listed as supernumary crew, ON duty, or OFF duty??
Either is fine! Attempting to be both is either duplicitous, or stupid! Each of which deserves to be dealt with appropriately.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ireland
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EASA Cat Ops
Hi,
An airline is responsible to manage FTLs and fatigue, under their SMS and FRM/FRMS. This is clearly defined in EASA Cat ops regulations.
An individual licence holder is responsible to report fit to fly.
Home base definition is being amended from Feb 2016 ftl introduction.
The emphasis on a high degree of permanence is explicit in the legislation.
Might be worthwhile to read the relevant info, and prevent a potential licensing issue.
“duty” means any task that a crew member performs for the operator, including flight duty, administrative work, giving or receiving training and checking, POSITIONING, and some elements of standby;
“home base” means the location, assigned by the operator to the crew member, from where the crew member normally starts and ends a duty period or a series of duty periods and where, under normal circumstances, the operator is not responsible for the accommodation of the crew member concerned;"
"positioning means the transferring of a non-operating crew member from one place to another, at the behest of the operator, excluding:
- the time of travel from a private place of rest to the designated reporting place at home base and vice versa, and
- the time for local transfer from a place of rest to the commencement of duty and vice versa;"
ORO.FTL.200 Home Base
An operator shall assign a home base to each crew member.
CS FTL.1.200 Home Base
(a) The home base is a single airport location assigned with a high degree of permanence.
(b) In the case of a change of home base, the first recurrent extended recovery rest period prior to starting duty at the new home base is increased to 72 hours, including 3 local nights. Travelling time between the former home base and the new home base is positioning.
An airline is responsible to manage FTLs and fatigue, under their SMS and FRM/FRMS. This is clearly defined in EASA Cat ops regulations.
An individual licence holder is responsible to report fit to fly.
Home base definition is being amended from Feb 2016 ftl introduction.
The emphasis on a high degree of permanence is explicit in the legislation.
Might be worthwhile to read the relevant info, and prevent a potential licensing issue.
“duty” means any task that a crew member performs for the operator, including flight duty, administrative work, giving or receiving training and checking, POSITIONING, and some elements of standby;
“home base” means the location, assigned by the operator to the crew member, from where the crew member normally starts and ends a duty period or a series of duty periods and where, under normal circumstances, the operator is not responsible for the accommodation of the crew member concerned;"
"positioning means the transferring of a non-operating crew member from one place to another, at the behest of the operator, excluding:
- the time of travel from a private place of rest to the designated reporting place at home base and vice versa, and
- the time for local transfer from a place of rest to the commencement of duty and vice versa;"
ORO.FTL.200 Home Base
An operator shall assign a home base to each crew member.
CS FTL.1.200 Home Base
(a) The home base is a single airport location assigned with a high degree of permanence.
(b) In the case of a change of home base, the first recurrent extended recovery rest period prior to starting duty at the new home base is increased to 72 hours, including 3 local nights. Travelling time between the former home base and the new home base is positioning.
Last edited by Fogie; 12th Jan 2016 at 13:18.
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Centre of Universe
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depone
True but it would significantly hit the extended recovery rest period if crew are having to include the pax day on a 'day off' ?
There seems to be two issues here;
Crews travelling day before / before FDP
FR contract crews traveling from where they live to any base
I heard that EASA definition of home base was aimed at FR !!
True but it would significantly hit the extended recovery rest period if crew are having to include the pax day on a 'day off' ?
There seems to be two issues here;
Crews travelling day before / before FDP
FR contract crews traveling from where they live to any base
I heard that EASA definition of home base was aimed at FR !!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are off duty, you cannot be required to be in uniform, you have no business using your ID to access the secure area of an airport without a ticket, and you most definitely can never be described as supernumary CREW! ( The clue's in the name!) Being 'off' duty does not accrue FTL restrictions.
Let's look at it from a different perspective, why should an airline NOT facilitate its off duty crew to travel on empty seats if these employees can prove that they travel between their home and their aircraft? It is not as if these companies are handing out freebees, it's the nature of air transport that homes can be hundreds of miles away from base. So why do you object to airlines and regulators who find a way to accommodate commuters?