Kip Powick Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Perhaps fewer F/As in the back as TC may relax manning restrictions...Unions not happy. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20031016.r-airline-staff16/BNStory/Business/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon The Loon Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 That writing has been on the wall for about 10 years now. ICAO standards prescribe 1 F/A for each 50 pax. Canada was the exception with 1 for 40. Enter the Dash 8 300 in the early 90's and the request to use only 1 F/A. This was granted. Then came the RJ's. Again, an appeal to operate with only 1 F/A. Oddly enough, BA operates their 50 seater ERJ's with 2. TC has been trying to move the whole system towards ICAO standards, including revision (gutting!) of the approach ban limits and other "differences". Kinda makes sense in a "big picture" kinda way, dontcha think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudder Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 A slight history lesson - first request for "relief" from the 1:40 rule came from Air Canada and was made specifically for the CRJ. Requests for other fleet types from other operators followed the granting of the AC request by TC. rudder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WF9F Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 What they need to do now is change the flight times and duty times for pilots, to bring them more in line with ICAO standards,that would be a step forward. The flight and duty times in the UK were certainly nice enough to work under when i was there. Cheers WF9F Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Clumsy Lover Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Good, It's about time thay standardized things. The only reason at all that you need 2 for 50 is if you had an airline that wanted to give quality service to the customers in the back. Let's face it, F/A's can talk safety all they want but in one day you can train one. They are there for customer service. If they really were "Paramedic's , Police, and Firefighters" as she says in the article you would have to can almost 70% of the old shoppers annonymous club at AC. Most of the old gals I see give great service but most can't lift their Duty free into the closet let alone rip a ceiling appart and put a fire out up there. If they want to play that card why not make them undergo the same physical testing that firefighters do or perhaps some personality screening like some city police do. "What, you can't last 40 minutes on the stairmaster and you have the personality of a stump... bye bye". Maybe then we'd get to keep some of the younger less jaded people who have gotten the can recently. Even at the wages that JetsGo pays the folks in the back they manage to get people to smile and do it because they want to have a good time. And why did they even ask WestJet... Ok, I know the answer to that... but the reporter should have been smart enough to figure out that it wouldn't matter to them if it was 40 or 50. They need 3 no matter how you divide the numbers up. And the great line about saving's to the airlines, give me a break. No matter what the rule the I/C on a AC RJ will always make more than the F/O does. If AC wanted to make money how about paying the F/A's industry standard wages. Or below Industry standard wages like the RJ F/O. Mitch went on a rant a little while ago about the good guys leaving MTC. And it's true, Nothing has changed at AC. The skilled people with the licences in hand that make things work get shafted. The unskilled people with no licence that can get trained in a DAY are sitting fat dumb and happy compared to their couterparts at other airlines. The guy holding the flashlights waving the Dash in makes more than most of the pilot's do at Jazz. And they wonder why crew both in MTC and Operations are leaving like rats to Westjet and the sandbox. Flame away... rant over... sorry about the spelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Unfortunately, that would not be seen as a regulatory change which would reduce costs. ATAC would scream, and TC would cave in. Prior to the ValuJet crash, the FAA had a dual mandate, requiring them to both promote and regulate the aviation industry. These came into direct conflict on several occasions. One of the strongest recommendations that came out of the NTSB investigation into the ValuJet crash was that the FAA's mandate be regulation only. I only hope the TSB doesn't have to make a similar recommendation in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.O. Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I'm not sure whether you're brave or crazy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydee Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Best post I've read in ages..!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HPT-TOUR Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Have to agree with you, when they have a job skill level to that req. at Tim Hortons but demand more than an FO there is something wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 I have been argueing the same forever. Nicel;y said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nigol Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Very good post. No flames from here. I like this part the best: "And it's true, Nothing has changed at AC. The skilled people with the licences in hand that make things work get shafted. The unskilled people with no licence that can get trained in a DAY are sitting fat dumb and happy compared to their couterparts at other airlines. The guy holding the flashlights waving the Dash in makes more than most of the pilot's do at Jazz. And they wonder why crew both in MTC and Operations are leaving like rats to Westjet and the sandbox." Therefore, I believe that AC will DIE!!!!!!!! Good show Robert Milton. Please leave now...'bye bye'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CD Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 And why did they even ask WestJet... Ok, I know the answer to that... but the reporter should have been smart enough to figure out that it wouldn't matter to them if it was 40 or 50. They need 3 no matter how you divide the numbers up... Actually, according the TC website, WestJet has been actively seeking this regulatory change since at least 1998. Why they would now indicate that they haven't made a final decision about modifying their staffing is bizarre... Decision Record - 26 March 2001 NPA 2000-331 & 2000-332 – Flight Attendant Requirements http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/RegServ/Affairs/carac/Technical/CARC/mar01/appendix3.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest givemeabreak Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 Beautifully said C.L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CarryOn Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 "Let's face it, F/A's can talk safety all they want but in one day you can train one. They are there for customer service." I honestly hope that you seriously don't believe this. I happen to be in Training and you cannot train a F/A in one day in regards to safety. Do you think after one day that you would be able to know where all the emergency equipment was located on 7 different aircraft types? How about the water and electrical emergency procedures for each galley and Lav? How about door operations in emergency and normal procedures and slide and slide/rafts for each different aircraft type? I could go on and on. Flight Attendants are highly trained to be there in case of an emergency. The exceptional service you get is another one of our talents. While I will agree with you that some of our F/A's have lost there spark, they still have to pass annual recurrrent training, so they do know how to save your life maybe just not with a smile:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AME Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 You're abraver man than I I would like to point out that it's not the F/As fault or the ramp attenentands fault that they make more than an F/O the only people to blame for that is your own union The other groups have what they have because they were able to negotiate it, so don't go blaming them because you weren't able to do the same. :S Brett I could say that there is no way any F/O should make more than the engineer signing out the aircraft, but that's our fault Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RoyalQN Posted October 16, 2003 Share Posted October 16, 2003 CL, I agree with many of the things you have to say, but not all is as simple as you suggest. Yes, it is sad that many unskilled workers make more than RJ f/o's. I know what RJ f/o's make and it is a disgrace to be honest. Couple that with the fact that the RJ is known to be tricky to fly in some ways, and it's always going up and down, so technically always in critical phases of flight, as opposed to a long-range aircraft that is comfortably in the cruise for hours on end. But, if f/a's could be trained in one day, then why don't airlines do that? Why does it take Air Canada 7 weeks to train an f/a? Even Jetsgo takes 3 or 4 weeks to train theirs, and that's on one aircraft type. And I can assure you, there is little or no service training involved in those weeks. To be fair, I think Air Canada f/a's are overpaid, especially at the top. I do also think that Jetsgo f/a's are underpaid. A more fair system exists at Skyservice and Air Transat, where the first year, or couple of years are not paid too well, but it goes up to livable standards soon, but not to levels that are rediculous. Why should a f/a get the same pay as a nurse? Or a teacher? I find that disgraceful. Keep in mind, I'm a former f/a, and I am training to be a pilot, so I think I know a thing or two about both positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Clumsy Lover Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Ok... I'll admit when I'm wrong. I just looked at the training sylabus for F/A's from the TC website. Things haev changed I guess since the old days when when the PWA F/A's went on strike and the company had a good chunk of the flight up again the next day after a 20 hr course. And yes, not all ramp people make more than Jazz pilots, the captains anyway... Nor I am trying to say that a person isn't entitled to a descent wage in this country. I have seen far to many cases though over the years of people wanting to further themselves by getting an education, whether it be a flying one or an AME avenue that have gotten shafted. It takes a lot of years of hard work to get into these positions. I know, I was a former Aircraft Tech and and now a pilot. I have also worked in training... It just cheezes me off when you see what aviation has become in the eyes of a lot of people. Most AME's and pilots have spent years working in camps, loading airplanes, huddled around herman nelsons etc. to get the chance to have a descent life in an airline. I can't say for other carriers but in the AC family it appears to me that F/A's get hired and believe in their minds that aviation is staying in a nice hotel and getting a chance to do some shopping. Most F/A's, ground crew, CSA's etc haven't busted their hump for years to get into the business and the "hand out give me attitude" of a lot of these folks cheezes me off. Aviation shouldn't be a gravy ticket. Is a AC 747 capt worth his salary.. maybe, maybe not depending on who you talk to. However an RJ F/O at either airline, A MD80 crew and a lot of the AME's are underpaid so far as I'm concerned. And like I said I have no problem with anyone earning the wage they do, I'd just like to see them deserve it instead of demand it. We have all this high priced help at AC but the check in line is still miles long and the folks upstairs are still to busy fighting over empires instead of getting down to our business. Moving bums with a smile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Clumsy Lover Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Ok... I'll admit when I'm wrong. I just looked at the training sylabus for F/A's from the TC website. Things haev changed I guess since the old days when when the PWA F/A's went on strike and the company had a good chunk of the flight up again the next day after a 20 hr course. And yes, not all ramp people make more than Jazz pilots, the captains anyway... Nor I am trying to say that a person isn't entitled to a descent wage in this country. I have seen far to many cases though over the years of people wanting to further themselves by getting an education, whether it be a flying one or an AME avenue that have gotten shafted. It takes a lot of years of hard work to get into these positions. I know, I was a former Aircraft Tech and and now a pilot. I have also worked in training... It just cheezes me off when you see what aviation has become in the eyes of a lot of people. Most AME's and pilots have spent years working in camps, loading airplanes, huddled around herman nelsons etc. to get the chance to have a descent life in an airline. I can't say for other carriers but in the AC family it appears to me that F/A's get hired and believe in their minds that aviation is staying in a nice hotel and getting a chance to do some shopping. Most F/A's, ground crew, CSA's etc haven't busted their hump for years to get into the business and the "hand out give me attitude" of a lot of these folks cheezes me off. Aviation shouldn't be a gravy ticket. Is a AC 747 capt worth his salary.. maybe, maybe not depending on who you talk to. However an RJ F/O at either airline, A MD80 crew and a lot of the AME's are underpaid so far as I'm concerned. And like I said I have no problem with anyone earning the wage they do, I'd just like to see them deserve it instead of demand it. We have all this high priced help at AC but the check in line is still miles long and the folks upstairs are still to busy fighting over empires instead of getting down to our business. Moving bums with a smile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Clumsy Lover Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Ok, I'll admit when I'm wrong. I just looked at the traing sylabus for F/A's off the TC website and I guess things have changed since the days when PWA laid off F/A's and then had most of the flights back on sched after 20 hours or so of traing for the back end. I guess the point that I was trying to make was that it seems to me that aviation has become a gravy train for a lot of people. Most pilots and AME's ahve spent years trying to get to an AC or a Westjet. Years of loading planes, living in ATCO trailers and huddling around Herman Nelsons. Most of the F/A's that I have met think that aviation is getting hired and then staying in nice hotels and shopping. They haven't busted their butts for years to get to where they are. I also don't begrudge anyone for making a descent living but the "hand out give me attitude" that you see from a lot of the non liscenced peolpe in the industry cheezes me off. Same planet Different worlds I guess. Does a 747 capt deserve his salary, maybe maybe not dependign on who you talk to... But a RJ f/o, and MD80 crew, a lot of 737 F/O's and a lot of AME's are underpaid so far as I'm concerned. We have lots of high priced help at AC but the ticket line is still miles long, the phone wait is too long.. and the people upstairs are too busy fighting over empires intead of giong downstairs and doing what we should be doing. Moving bums with a smile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CarryOn Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 Apology accepted. Have a great weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest givemeabreak Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 trained yes, highly trained, no. It is amazing what one sees when in the back watching all these "highly skilled" individuals. Plus, are they retrained every 6 months? no Is there a medical? no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CD Posted October 17, 2003 Share Posted October 17, 2003 ICAO standards prescribe 1 F/A for each 50 pax. Actually, ICAO does not require a specic minimum cabin crew complement. The following requirement is in Annex 6 for cabin crew: "An operator shall establish, to the satisfaction of the State of the Operator, the minimum number of cabin crew required for each type of aeroplane, based on seating capacity or the number of passengers carried." Canada was the exception with 1 for 40. Australia has a cabin crew complement of 1 cabin crew for 36 passengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sky High Posted October 18, 2003 Share Posted October 18, 2003 "And why did they even ask WestJet... Ok, I know the answer to that... but the reporter should have been smart enough to figure out that it wouldn't matter to them if it was 40 or 50. They need 3 no matter how you divide the numbers up. " Ummmm.. but we don't use 3......... We use 4.. So that makes our ratio somewhat less than 1 - 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.