The "In Charge"
 

An intersting article in CHIRPs describes the chain of command as perceived by the cabin crew.

The "In Charge" rules aft of the flight-deck door. The pilots are merely there to get the aircraft from A to B. This is not an isolated incident.

A very experienced senior cabin crew member grudgingly admitted that the Captain may be in command, followed by the "In Charge" and lastly the two First Officers (a long haul flight) "just learning".

I've come across this culture in the 80s but not recently and am intrigued to learn why this perception has resurrected itself? A knock-on from the locked flight-deck door perhaps?

For the uninitiated the "In Charge" is the Senior Cabin Attendant

MP

For those of you who may not see the CHIRP publication the article ended with the story of the First Officer transfering any airworthy defects from the Cabin Defect Log to the Aircraft Tech Log.

There was a defect raised by "In Charge" in the Cabin Defect Log.......

Two BCF fire extinguisers used at the rear of the aircraft.

On enquiring he discovered that there had been an oven fire but the "In Charge" decided it was not necessary to inform the flight crew!!

The "in charge" should be given a p45 for gross neglect of duty and endangering lives etc. I can't believe after all the CRM courses we've all been on that they would withhold that information in these days.

Anyone with knowledge of the company will of course realise that the incident refers to British Airways. Its not uncommon for Cabin Service Directors/ Pursurs to think they have more power than the Captain.

Yep,
Read it this morning and couldn't believe my eyes.
In my humble opinion sacking the 'In charge' in question will not solve the problem. This looks like it stems from the top and a change of cabin crew training + top cabin crew management is what's needed.
Then again I don't work for BA so have no first hand experience of this - after reading this I don't think I want to either. :yuk:

If I got this straight, the aircraft suffered an on-board fire and the aircraft commander wasn't advised of the fact???

Feedback 65, containing said article, available on the web here.

I remember sitting behind two females in the crew transport, a Purser and newly promoted CSD. The CSD was explaining the step from Purser to CSD. "The difference from being a Purser is at the end of the day any problem on the aircraft is your problem, there is nobody else on the aircraft to turn to. It’s your problem and you have to sort it"

What example does this set for junior cabin crew when some CSD's put themselves on such a pedestal?

On a similar vein of setting a good example, new cabin crew entrants during their training are encouraged to remember the location of fire extinguishers in the 757 flight deck by the following.....

"The water is behind the w**ker and the BCF is behind the b**tard".

Alas it will NEVER change.

Got to admit I've never seen this attitude on the flights I've flown. Admittedly mostly with my own mob(s). Sure, have run into the king of the cabin once or twice but Captain rules. Next are First and Second officers to avoid annoying anyone.

Cabin staff get the emergency training - get to use it very, very rarely. Know the safety speil backwards. Most of the work is feeding and thinking about how to spend the lay-over. Most are not familiar with the concept of conducting a complex event in a dangerous environment, or even how machines can fly. Most, I say, for there are some top notch FAs.

Should be handled accordingly...
While deadheading on a Continental flight (B707, long ago), one of the pax came up for a visit (told you it was long ago...) and informed the Captain that the InFlight Supervisor had told him that HE was in charge of the flight.
The Captain summoned the chap and asked him (yes, a boy) if he knew where the nose of the aeroplane was.
The fellow says..."well, yes Captain".
Captain says..."just to be sure, look down, way down over the glareshield to be sure.
IFS does so and says he sees the nose of the aeroplane.
Captain mentions...."do you KNOW where the white light at the tail is?"
IFS replies in the affirmative.
Captain says...."in between those two places, it belongs to ME, every thing else is yours...now get your skinny @ss back in the cabin and keep your mouth SHUT".

IFS retreats...without a word.

Worked like a charm.

411A

How delightful - did that captain ever write any CRM papers ?

rt

Make up your minds lads!
411A says what most of the above posters are implying and gets attacked for it!:rolleyes:

All of the above clearly shows that CRM is just a buzz-word.
Every year at the refresher we pay lip service to it. In some enlightened companies the course combines F/D and F/A members. We answer all the questions and do our group exercises. Thereafter it's a free for all.

Of course the Ops Manual Part A clearly states the chain of command on board an aircraft. Obviously many Cabin Crew members do not even read it. (or perhaps do not have access to it?)

I think it is about time that airline managements and regulatory bodies tackle the issues raised, especially cases like the cabin fire mentioned.

Having said all that, I have flown with many good No1's whom I would like to have with me if something was to go wrong. The lives of the pax, the crew and indeed myself might depend on it.

Hopefully we can shift that 'Them and Us' attitude. Let's do it!!:ok: :ok:

I'm a male "In charge" but for another UK airline (charter with a big grin!).

I have no illusions about the chain of command - nor does any other "In charge" that I have met: Commander, F/O, then us. I only mention this because I have a suspicion that this problem is one that is specific to a particular large British airline, rather than a widespread one amongst the industry. At least that's my perception.

That said, I do have a concern about the volume, and quality, of communications thru a locked flight deck door: I'm not suggesting that we don't lock the door, but I believe that more concentration by the legislative authorities needs to be applied to the communications issues that arise as a result.

If two BCFs can be fired off down the back then it is my guess that long before it was time to fill out the tech log most of the CC would have known. The fact that no one saw fit to tell the captain, particularly the CSD, indicates to me that a serious cancer has set in to the lines of communication and the chain of command in that company and urgently needs to be sorted.

One CC not knowing the form is possible but an entire crew is unacceptable, in my opinion.

woodpecker

Why do you say the culture will never change?

My late employers spent a lot of time, money and expertise to eradicate the problems thay had in the 80s. It can be done!!

If there is a will within the management structure, and I'm assuming we are talking about BA, something must be done. Under JAR-Ops the responsibility must rest with the CEO or responsible person.

I remember an Air Canada DC9 with a toilet fire when the flight-deck were blissfully unaware of the severity of the fire until it's too late.

Let's hope history does not repeat itself with regards to the CRM issues.

MP

Pete

Was it not your late employers who set up a system of negative checks from Cabin Crew?

For the understanding of others, there was NO landing check, for instance, given to Flight Deck as long as all was well in the cabin. This procedure was introduced at a time when Ops management was particularly cavalier and was only rescinded as an SOP under extreme pressure from the CAA.

Whilst not liking it, the Pilots meekly accepted this state of affairs!

oscar

oscar,

As far as I can recall, and in some people's eyes I'm only one step from my basket, we used to have an indicator on the pedestal.

This was an aide memoire that the cabin was secure for take-off and secure for landing. The cabin crew would come in and either tell you or move the little "widget" or both.

There may well have been a time when there was no cabin status reporting but sense and reason has prevailed and the shortcomings rectified.

Let's hope the "In Charges" are re-educated ASAP.

MP

I agree with what everyone has said previuosly - the flight deck crew should be kept informed of any unusual incident. However I am not sure that this lack of communication will be improved now that the flight deck is barred and bolted and cut off from the rest of the aircraft - it doesn't do much for a 'team' spirit amongst all the crew.

I was rather more concerned about the following story where the captain decided to operate a full commercial flight with one emergency exit u/s. The Captain in question did not agree with the cabin crew that the door was u/s and the flight should be operated under MEL conditions. As someone who has 'locked out' many doors over the years I have to say that I have never come across any member of the flight deck crew who would countenance such a course of action. Are the commercial pressures on flight crew now getting to the point where basic safety issues are now no longer the primary consideration?

:(

Jet 11

Unless you are able to give details of the defect, one would have to say that the Captain was probably right because it would have been his assesment, in the absence of an approved engineer, that the door was indeed u/s.

The door need not neccesarily have to be working in a convenient (to Cabin Crew) way for it to be properly operable in an emergency situation and, having had it reported to him, I am sure that the Captain would have taken these circumstances into consideration before taking the decision to go.

The combination of expediency and professionalism as practised by a Captain is a very fine line indeed, which is easy to occasionally misinterprate as dangerous by the misinformed or ignorant.

Shout "safety" and too many people duck for cover instead of being objective. It's called arse-covering in some circles.

oscar

oscarh

I assume that you have read the report, but the bit that concerns me was the comment
Therefore both flight deck members knew that the door was faulty - this is not a 'grey area' - if the door is u/s then it must be considered an inoperative exit in accordance with the MEL.

The Captain did not have the training to assess whether the door was serviceable, so in the absence of a engineer then the door should have been assumed to be u/s and properly deferred in the aircraft log.

Jet II

I do not condone the actions of the Flight Crew here at all, and reading through the lines, nor the does the author of the CHIRP comments.

However:
<<Once all the passengers had disembarked both flight crew attempted to disarm the door and both confirmed they were unable to successfully do so>>
<<Therefore both flight deck members knew that the door was faulty - this is not a 'grey area' - if the door is u/s then it must be considered an inoperative exit in accordance with the MEL>>

Bear in mind the number of doors required is the number of EMERGENCY exits. Therefore, if it could be established that the door would operate in an emergency mode i.e. slide would inflate, then the fact it could not be disarmed might not matter.

Whatever, the MEL should should have been consulted. It is for the MEL to state what "Door U/S" means... It would almost certainly have been subdivided into which part of the door was u/s, and the appropriate limitations stated.

In practice, I cannot see how, as Flt Crew, I could make the judgement on whether it would operate. Only an engineer can state that against a Tech log entry.

NoD

CHIRP
 

Is this report available on the web?

NoD

Quite agree, however the flight crew had no way of knowing whether the slide would have deployed in an emergency (as subsequent events showed it would not have!)

If the door is operating in a 'non-normal' way and there is no way the crew can confirm its serviceability then it has to be assumed to be u/s and the MEL provisions actioned accordingly.

You are right with your last statement - it is for the Engineer to assess whether the door serviceable for despatch - it is the crews responsibility to put the defects in the book.



UFGBOY - Go to Chirp and click on Feedback 65

Back to the original subject...

We have only ourselves to blame if the CSD's or whatever are left with the impression that they are in command. In the past I have seen captains fail to give their cabin staff the support they deserve when it comes to pax problems. The case was quoted of the flight deck leaving the cabin to deal with a large number of delayed pax with the casual comment "See you in the Hotel then!"

Being a Captain involves a lot more than wearing four rings. It means demonstrating your responsibility consistently and not just when it suits you.

Respect is earned. If you haven't received the level you think is appropriate, first consider where you or your colleagues have gone wrong.

Then kick a***!

Too true Lou

I am always amazed when I see flight deck crew getting off before all the pax are unloaded.

I would have thought that the Captain should be the last off - bit like on a sinking ship.

;)

Misnomer
 

Seems to me that naming the Purser "In Charge" is inviting misinterpretation! Maitre or Purser conveys the point. On the subject does your airline call the Captain, the Captain or Commander?

They are also known as "Galley Admirals".

Yes, I've paxed with BA and seen the flight-deck leave before us, APU still runnning, hot-footing it to their segregated bus, 'cos in those days they went to the Queen's Building and the cabin crew somewhere on Northside.

Yes, there is a lot more to commanding than ruuning around with four stripes up as anyone doing the job properly will tell you. You earn respect and loyalty and it must be reciprocated. When you reach that stage you hopefully have a cohesive team and you lead it from the front.

Tha't my bit for now as I'm leading a mission to the pub.

MP

Lou scannon - I like a lot of what you say generally and in this case you've hit the nail on the head. I was ALWAYS the LAST off the aircraft - made sure all pax looked after and cabin crew off also. When it comes down to explaining chain of command to the CSD/purser I have NEVER had a problem there either. If they start being a bit arsy then I tell them straight, adding at the same time that they always have my FULL support and back-up with any problems they may encounter during the flight, and the first officers full support and back-up. Things have always worked smoothly thereafter.... It's not a big deal, just don't be afraid of the PC brigade and their "everyone is equal" claptrap.
For the record I have just left BA, where most of this PC rubbish happens and am now with an overseas airline that very definately teaches the correct chain of command to all CC. Very refreshing indeed.

Dear White Knight,

This whole episode stems from a misinterpreted aricle in CHIRP.

A member of flight crew mistook the term 'In Charge' and also thought the report had been filed by someone within BA.

Some UK airlines refer to their SCCMs as 'In Charge CC Member' or the 'In Charge'.

These mistakes have taken on a life all of their own and have been debated ad nauseam by the flight crew community in places like the ba council forum and all on the basis of a bad premise.

Why, the whinges and moans within the council forum have even led to panicky messages by safety and security staff on the crewlink.

No one within BA flying staff is in doubt as to the chain of command.

All commanders are captains, whereas not all captain are commanders, wouldn't you agree.

Good luck with your newfound, overseas employers. No doubt I'll see you in a sleazy bar somewhere around the world, happily chatting to some of the arsy people you describe...

:yuk:

One of the best lines I heard on this subject.
Purser: CA what would you like to be if you could come back
reincarnated?
CA: A purser.
Purser: Why?
CA: Because for one time in my life I really want to know what
it is like to command an aircraft.
Purser: It sucks.

The poll results are interesting only 50% being clear that the Captain is King.This problem does exisit in Big Airways but it is a minority of militants.The last time I heard of an incident the skipper offloaded the cabin crew member and filed an ASR.

Another interesting aspect of the situation is where the regular CC pay no attention to the cabin Chief...because of his/her nationality....or any other reason.
Recall years ago enroute DHA-RUH and scheduled to CDG, the cabin Chief (from Morocco, and very competent) complained that two CC would not follow her instructions.
Had 'em offloaded at RUH and replaced....they were summarily dismissed a few days later.
Not wise to challange the Chief.

This problem seems inflight management based.they are putting unsafe ideas in the flight attendents minds .I have heard capt's ask the incharge some safety related questions (he never knows hit him)also ask all the other cabin crew to come in with their torches ,check the torches and ask them some questions in the presence of the incharge if the answers are not satisfactory debrief the incharge and/or offload the crew.May sound stern but it is a good idea to get the get the chain of command right before the flight.

Establish a relationship
 

In these days of short turn rounds and crew changes during the day's work, what I am about to propose is getting more and more difficult but is well worth the effort:

Try meeting the CC and the whole crew before flight - preferably during their briefing. Introduce yourself and the FO. Just have a short friendly chat - point out any special points for the day (turbulence/wx - security items - new procedures - pax related items) and ask if they have any points to make. If they are running through an evac/emer briefing, the Capt/FO input can be very interesting. The Capt/FO often learn something too.

When you get on board, everybody has an idea who and how you are and you have an idea how the cabin crew are. This makes a huge difference not only in normal ops but also in an emergency situation.

Too often the extent of the contact when first meeting the CC is a question "What do you drink, water or coffee?" and not much of substance.

Well, I would never leave an aircraft at the end of duty until the rest of the crew were all done, the sole exception being if I have another flight to operate that is in danger of delay if I dawdle, in which case I bid my farewells and hit the ground running.

These days though, a more common scenario is to walk out of the flight deck saying 'Everyone ready? Lets go', to see an empty cabin (divider gently flapping in the breeze, equivalent to a piece of tumbleweed blowing through a ghost town) because the cabin crew legged it 5 milliseconds after the final passenger.

CPB

Just after I got my command on a large a/c with lots of engines go great distances, I was informed by an i/c fa that "the trouble is that captains think they have more authority than they have and i/c's are reluctant to use the command that they have been given."

I initially thought that I was being wound up however after further discussion I found that he believed that what he was saying was true. This chap was a CC trainer.

Methinks we may have lost the plot.

:(

The plot generally was lost in the UK a long time ago - especially in Big Airways. You have to understand that it's UNFAIR for a pilot to have more authority than a CC, hence the fact that CC trainers like to push the idea with their trainees that the "in charge" is the number one on the aircraft. Management of course go along with this lovey dovey PC nonsense, including flight ops managers. Come on people - get some back bone here and deal with these fools......
I'd really like to see the CSD land a crippled aeroplane safely, having used their years of experience and training to cope with that one really bad hair day.

Why is it that everyone seems to forget: At 30,000 ft everybody's lives are totally in the hands of the drivers up the front.
Em! That makes them the bosses in anybody's book surely.
Some F.A's should ponder on this at 30west when wondering if they are senior to the F/O:}