Virgin Atlantic pilots consider strike over fatigue
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66421175Pilots at Virgin Atlantic have indicated they would consider going on strike following "serious concerns" about fatigue and their wellbeing.

Union Balpa said that in a recent vote, 96% of Virgin Atlantic pilots supported a ballot on industrial action. At issue are scheduling and rostering arrangements that were put in place during Covid which will come to an end in December. Virgin said it was willing to enter into talks in the coming weeks. The airline said the existing pay and lifestyle agreement was "agreed, developed and supported by Balpa pilot representatives within Virgin Atlantic, and our pilot community".

A spokesperson for Virgin Atlantic said: "We continue to honour all agreements and have offered to enter formal pay and lifestyle negotiations with Balpa's pilot union representatives in the coming weeks, well in advance of the agreement expiring in December."

Airlines were one of the worst hit industries during the pandemic after international travel came to a standstill to stop the spread of Covid. Virgin Atlantic employs 835 pilots and it is believed the majority are members of the Balpa pilots' union. A spokesperson for Balpa said: "Our members have registered a trade dispute with Virgin Atlantic arising out of serious concerns relating to pilot fatigue and wellbeing around scheduling and rostering arrangements, implemented during the Covid-19 pandemic." It said that 81% of its Virgin Atlantic union members voted in the ballot which its said gave Balpa "an overwhelming mandate to pursue this dispute".

The maximum flying time for a commercial pilot is 900 hours per calendar year, according to the Civil Aviation Authority. It is understood that the rostered average for Virgin Atlantic pilots is around 750 hours.

Virgin Atlantic is part of Virgin Group, which was founded by Sir Richard Branson. The billionaire recently told the BBC that he feared losing his entire business empire, which also include gyms and hotels, during the pandemic. He said the shutdowns cost him £1.5bn personally. Sir Richard had asked the UK government for help in 2020 but was rejected. In the end, Virgin Group injected £200m into the airline and secured other investment to keep the business afl oat. At the time, it cut 3,500 staff, leaving it with 6,500 employees.

On Sunday, a spokesperson for Virgin Atlantic said that the airline "underwent a radical transformation as a result of the impact of Covid-19, which was possible due to the collective effort of our amazing people". They said: "This was fundamental to our survival and our steadfast commitment to returning to sustainable profitability. We're grateful to them all, including our pilots who play a pivotal role in the success of our operation."

Balpa said its members "feel very strongly" about pilot fatigue and wellbeing. The union said it prefers to address matters through "negotiation and industrial compromise and will only countenance industrial action as a last resort". It added: "We remain ready to commence negotiations to find an acceptable way forward and urge Virgin Atlantic to listen to its staff and put forward an acceptable offer that our members could support."

I could never fathom it became regularly acceptable to roster Crews both Flight Deck and Cabin, to operate London to say Los Angeles, Joburg or Cape Town and reckon it was quite OK to assume a Crew was 'rested' enough after just one night Hotac at the Destination, then to operate the flight back the next day to London overnight.

It once was at least 2-3 days Rest at Destination on flights of that length, now 24 hours or less, seems the norm...

Nowadays regulations even encourage short layovers, because on longer layovers the crew is considered acclimatized to the local time zone and thus requires an extra local night rest when back at homebase 🥴

Yebbut time zone is not an issue for Joburg, Kaapstad etc.

I flew longhaul from 1997 to 2013. Tiredness was a constant - especially when flying and home life were added together.
Fatigue is far more dangerous in that you don't realise how badly you are performing - I think the effects of alcohol are very similar so VS
need to take their crews concerns seriously.
All airline crew are humans first and foremost and even if a computerised scheduling tool says it's legal safe to fly the results - over time - will lead to mistakes and thus potential accidents.

For passengers - take a look at your crew boarding at their home base. If they are showing signs of "tiredness" after being at home then that could be fatigue....

Corporate Greed. Pure and simple.
The old saying, if they think safety is expensive, try having an accident. Well it doesn't happen very often. Only need one.

And who made you a moderator??
If I strap my backside to an aircraft operated by a fatigued crew, it is my business.

what happens at VS when you submit a fatigue report?

it gets filed, but most of us are too tired to fill them out.

Most companies have a 'process' where fatigue reports are examined by an ambitious manager to determine if other circumstances might be blamed for the pilots fatigue. The pilot gets questioned about his home circumstances, does he/she have small kids, was you rest at home disturbed, was your rest in the crew hotel disturbed or maybe your bidding for back-to-back or other trip combinations is responsible for your fatigue? Companies have even been known to request room bills from crew hotels to determine what the pilot's alcohol consumption had been in an effort to reassign the blame. Then finally, there is always the question with the veiled threat..... If you are getting fatigued then may this job is not for you?

Fatigue can cause micro blackouts also. Not a lot of people are aware of this. I know this is true.This was never mentioned in any human performance training or manuals in my day
I would suggest, get hold of one of these accountants, invite he or she along for the whole trip. Make sure that they stay awake in the A/C. When back at base let them go back to their sums. That may give these people an idea how fatigue, will effect human performance and mental agility. I chose accountants for a purpose.

When was the last time Virgin actually made a profit? Or over time, have they ever been cash positive?

If a company makes a profit, it pays tax on that profit. Clever accountants will mitigate tax liability, which is why airlines don't (apparently) make much profit, (when it suits them).

Good on the Virgin aircrews for considering this action. As has been debated on several other Pprune threads, Ts & Cs will never improve if we continue to accept things as they are. We need to take a stand.

Why should aircrews supplement the passenger's ticket prices or the CEOs pay packets by working poor Ts & Cs ?

A properly respected and motivated aircrew will improve company performance and profits far more than a disillusioned, exhausted aircrew, who have low quality of working life, and low quality home life.

Well said. Direct action will be the only language they will understand.

I know, right? It's been going for nearly 40 years without making any money.

Makes you wonder why they bother.

sounds like good old Monarch …..

When I looked after Virgin 747 Classic crews at Gatwick 1988-1994 (VS had 8 x 747's at that time) the Rosters and crew layovers were not a source of complaint back then AFAIR.
It was in the later years after I had gone that my Crew friends bitterly complained that the rosters had became very 'tight' and that just one night at Destination and B2B's became the norm...


This is an older story from a MAS Malaysian Airlines System Boeing 747-400 'local' pilot (First Officer) from some years ago (told from around the early 2000's?)
which is an interesting read. >>>

Hi there.
I have worked at MAS (Malaysian Airlines) for the past 11 years. I am Malay and was selected for the MAS Cadet Pilot AB-INITIO Program in 1994. A group of us cadets then completed all of our initial Pilot Licences and Flight Training at BAE Systems Flight Training in Adelaide, Australia over a 10 month period.
We then came back to Kuala Lumpur KL and underwent further training inhouse with Malaysian Airlines. A few months later, I was lucky to be place on and then trained on the Boeing B737-300/400.
These Classic B737s were excellent airplanes to fly.
Our routes on the B737 basically linked KL with all of the major cities and islands within 3 hours flying time throughout Southeast Asia.
Two years later my seniority allowed me to move up to the Airbus A330-300 widebody, which was a brand new airplane in our fleet, with state of the art FBW technologically. The A330 also has a lot of range and allowed me to fly as far as Australia, the Middle East, India, and Japan.

Three and a half good years flying the Airbus A330, and again my seniority gains allowed me to move up and this time I accepted a spot on the Queen of the Fleet and the Queen of the Skies - the Boeing B747-400 Widebody!
What an awesome airplane, and also an incredible view taxiing from way up in our office/cockpit.
I then was flying the B747 all over the world for many years.
The range on this aircraft is staggering, and because of this long range, the cockpit is equipped with a Bunk Sleeping cabin with 2 beds and a door for privacy. We use these beds for proper sleeps and rest on our flights over 8 hours - which happens to be most of them.
Our destinations on the B744 are excellent. My favourite places to fly into and out of are London Heathrow and LAX (Los Angeles). My favorite destinations to visit and spend a 2 day layover are Buenos Aires (Argentina), Cape Town (South Africa), Los Angeles (USA), and Vancouver (Canada).

Our rosters on the B747 are quite good - mostly due to the long flying times between KL and our destinations. Because the flights are mostly over 12 hours, we get very good layover times and nice hotels once we reach the destination - usually 48 hours or longer in the hotel. 48 hours is a perfect amount of time for some rest and some exploring. When we return home to KL, the flight again is usually over 10 or 12 hours and we will receive at least 2-3 days off at home to recover and get ready for our next journey.
So all in all the rostering system at MAS is good and healthy.

Because of the long range of the B744, most of our flights involve two sets of crews - meaning 2 Captains and 2 First Officers. One crew usually operates the first half of the flight, and the second the latter part of the flight.
Becoming a MAS Pilot, and a B747 Pilot, was a dream come true for me. I highly recommended the MAS Cadet Pilot Program for any Malay or Malaysian citizens interested in aviation. I also recommend MAS as a great place to work and fly for experienced pilots - both Malaysian and expats.
Over the last year or so, many of our experienced First Officers, and some Captains, have opted to leave and take on positions at the growing Middle Eastern airlines like Etihad, Qatar, and Emirates. For that reason, MAS now has a bit of a shortage of experienced pilots and will most likely be recruiting expats to fill the void over the next few years.
I hope you found this helpful.

I regularly operate LON to Mexico, Costa Rica etc with just two pilots. Flight time is often 10-12 hours. Add report time and you can see it’s a long day out. These trips are 24 hours.
we do however get 3 local nights off after them.
regularly fall asleep on the fight home. File a report every time and nothing changes been doing it since EASA regs came in 10 (?) years ago.

I witnessed many times Virgin crews who had operated from London in LAX arriving in the hotel in Torrance late afternoon. I then saw them checking out again just over 24 hours later to operate the return leg and they never looked rested. IIRC didn't the regulations recommend avoiding rests periods between 18 and 30 hours?

Ahh! Bishto
 

When the CAA's Rob Bishton feels the need to make a statement about how Virgin Airlines comply with all fatigue and FDP regulation you know it's getting desperate. This is the same individual when presented with absolute documented proof of illegal rostering and fatigue issues at a UK airline stated "

“Final Correspondence on FTL matters” As I committed to you when you called me 2 weeks ago, 2 people have reviewed the information pertaining to your query and their determination was referred to me. I concurred with them in that there is nothing more for the CAA to investigate. Furthermore, as I reiterated to you when we spoke, discussions between the CAA and the Post Holders within an AOC are treated confidentially and you should not conclude that the CAA has not substantiated all the facts surrounding the flights you are referring to in your correspondence.

Yours sincerely,

Rob Bishton
Head of Flight Ops | UK CAA

‘NOTHING MORE FOR THE CAA TO INVESTIGATE – AND WHO DID THE ‘INVESTIGATION’?’

Bishton states that there was nothing more for the CAA to investigate. So who did the investigation using the evidence referred to in Book one of ‘Pulling Wings From Butterflies”? The CAA investigation officer was Kathryn Jones who, previously had stated to the BBC, “We have no evidence of significant safety concerns with regard to crew and fatigue”, adding; “The evidence the CAA has is that the fatigue of crew is not a significant safety concern.” Jones is the ‘Safety Improvement manager’ who claims on her LinkedIn profile her “specialist area of knowledge is fatigue management, including flight time limitations”. (yep, you are ahead of me, she has never flown commercially and is not a doctor.)

The other senior CAA officer involved was Glenn Bradley who suggested I should just ‘Get Over’ this breach of legislation that a judge had stated would result in an “obvious increased risk to those flying if “not complied with”

As George Orwell in 1984 wrote “The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

The full details can be found at https://pullingwingsfrombutterflies.com/arr-bishto

The CAA's priority is the continued prosperity of UK airlines. They have no interest in acting to ensure safe operations. So unless the Daily Mail presents them with a smoking gun (or a smoking hole) it's business as usual at the CAA.

Around 10 years ago the UK had a mature sensible FTL scheme. The regulations were formed over many years as a result of accidents, incidents and deaths where we promised the bereaved that we would learn from our past mistakes. Then one day we threw that ruleset in the bin in favour of a Pan-European system that bore no resemblance to either of the 'Gold Standards' of the UK or Germany.... All in the name of EU political expediency.

If no one will look out for you, you have to look out for yourself.

<span style="color:#222222;">Absolutely. The new FTLs were waved in or nodded through by our own airlines, unions and the CAA. I never understood why there was not a general walk-out by UK crews over that.

I think that big money has nobbled the CAA, BALPA and all the airline Company Councils.

"Safety is our biggest concern"......Yeah, right.

.

Unfortunately when the British public see headlines like "Virgin pilots to strike over fatigue concerns" they start to switch off. It is the same as the rail unions striking over 'safety concerns'.... They don't really give a toss about safety as they can stop the train whenever a safety need arises. They are striking about members losing their jobs as the world changes. We no longer need train guards when tickets are checked at the barriers and no longer need ticket offices when 90%+ are purchased online. If an emergency arises onboard the train will continue to the next station where it can be dealt with accordingly. The British public recognise completely that the world is changing and unions are resisting that change. Unions need to recognise that banging the 'Safety' drum in the media in order to scare and influence public opinion is a strategy that has long since outlived it's usefulness.

Unfortunately airliners cannot just pull-over when the pilots can no longer stay awake.

I do recall a while ago that Virgin pilots were negotiating lifestyle improvements with their employer. The goal was to reduce time away from home by reducing slip-time downroute. When that means 5 trips a month instead of 4 it rather defeats the benefit to lifestyle. Whatever you give to an employer.... They will take it... And still come back for more. An ambitious manager who is only going to be in post for 2 years has no care for the consequences of his actions. Short term gains that trigger his bonus are his only concern.

Just for some fairness airlines operated to Mexico etc with 24hr rest under CAP371 also so its NNUTS Nothing New Under The Sun

The history of 18-30hr rest periods is when UK Charter airlines operated 2 crew to Orlando on B767 etc many moons ago so day / night rotation. Things have moved on since then. 24hrs in East Coast is manageable - 24hrs in West Coast is beyond me but could be example mitigated by having extra crew / in-flight relief and time off on return to base.

Slight typo there 'The CAA's priority is the continued existence of UK Airlines' ensuring safe operations. UK Airlines wanted a level playing field with their Euro counterparts so that they could for example depart to Larnaca at 0700 rather than waiting until 0900 when the FTL allowed it. Factorisation of FDP over 7hrs sector length was something that came when FE's went. Most mature airlines (that hadn't gone bust) introduced their own limits with Union support when EASA came along. Biggest advantage of EASA FTL compared to CAP371?- when crews sold 2 days off then under CAP it was likely they would get 2 days off to keep the roster legal. Under EASA its easier to sell days off because of the 168 rule and not always get 2 extra days off!
The FTL hasn't changed much only the way the Airlines work crews to the max.....

Twiglet1 I don't get your argument here.... Are you saying FTLs were better under the old CAP371 or better under EASA?

Before we all switched to EASA some EU countries had no FTL rules at all..... I suppose it is the inevitable consequence of having legislation drafted by a committee of 27 nations that agreement could not be reached on adopting one of the existing 'Gold Standards'. Instead we arrive at the average of nought and best!

I know British shorthaul rules suffered as a consequence of EASA with more conservative FDPs on earlier departures. OTOH a certain British LH operator ran rosters for one fleet with the new ruleset a few months before introduction and got a nasty shock. They quickly had to go out and recruit some more pilots.

It’s swings and roundabouts when comparing CAP371 with EASA FTL’s. Losses and gains. You can still call fatigued prior to duty if you so feel. Additionally the Captain can reduce the duty period time below the tabulated standard and equally increase rest as he sees fit. It sure doesn’t resolve all problems of company excess but it helps when they continuously take the piss.

Magplug

EASA FTL is much better imho. The only protection missing from EASA FTL is days off but the few UK AOC that are now left have either agreements which are over and above or the working time directive. And if crews want to sell days off its much more easier. Its how airlines schedule their crews which is more of an issue - 24hrs in LAX gets a lot of sympathy from me.

It is, but not six times a month.

Probably the best comment on here...

Correct!

The CEO works hard for his remuneration, if it wasn’t for his skill and hard work VAA would have gone belly up over COVID. Worth every penny.

Yes agreed but that was 3 pilots not 2.

Unhappy aircrew
 

I have followed many threads on PPRuNe regarding the friction between flight crew and airline management.
Why is there this seeming lack of trust ? Pilots referring to managers as 'bean counters' and only looking at short term benefits. The pilots stating that fatigue is becoming a major safety issue, really ?
A recent thread compared plane and train unions citing 'safety issues' when really it had nothing to do with safety but just a bargaining chip to try and get the publics sympathy for what is really just wage and benefits negotiation.

I am a retired Master Mariner who served on British flag Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCC's), and then became an ocean freight logistics manager for a fleet of over deep sea 400 vessels.
In all my time at sea we never once used the 'safety' gimmick to try and obtain better conditions.
In fact in all my time at sea we officers never undertook industrial action. Similarly, there were no industrial disputes on our time chartered fleet.

Are airline pilots a superior breed that need to be mollycoddled, and always to be at the throats of their airlines?
Or are the airlines really that bad to work for?
What happened to mutual trust and appreciation ?

I don't know,! Can someone help me understand.?

Swiss Steve

Steve: before a few more aviation professionals respond in greater detail, I'll point out to you two general points:
1. Safety isn't a gimmick.
2. One of the insidious aspects of fatigue is that it slowly erodes your perception, and your ability to respond to cues.
At the end of a long flight, or a day of multiple sectors flown, the phase of flight that you are in (approach and landing) is where the need to be at your best.
If your "edge" has been dulled from fatigue (there have been studies a plenty over the years on that single topic) the risks in that critical phase increases.

Beyond that: the cargo in the aluminum tube behind you is people. It is not Game Boys, automobiles, wheat, coal, or other stuff as it is tends to be in a ship. (Cruise lines excepted).

also may I add you can’t just stop an aircraft

I would also suggest that the fatigue experienced on a 2 or 3 week sailing is a bit different from doing 4-6 transatlantic flights with 2 pilots and no rest , apart from closing your eyes bolt upright in the pilots seat for 45 mins at a time.

Maybe I'm mistaken...
 

But last time I checked, most aircraft move a lot faster than most boats. And there is the three dimensional aspect to be considered. Not to mention the hours in an 7500-8000 foot cabin pressure and the dry air.

If i properly understand boats, they can have an engine failure and they still will float quite readily. An aircraft with an engine failure has significant adverse yaw that i doubt most boats can match.

Just the fact that the captain of a boat can fully stand up and walk around a bit gives him a large advantage over most flight crew situations.

both hands up, I'd prefer most any aircraft over most any boat for crossing the Atlantic or Pacific.