Fatigue Reports
In the past we have frequently emphasised the importance of filing fatigue reports. The functioning of several safeguards within the newly introduced EU flight time limitations, such as validating mathematical fatigue models and avoiding the rostering of red-flag flights, heavily depends on constant feedback by the pilot community.
In the recent FSAG meeting the two pilot representatives agreed with the analysis conducted by the safety department based on the fatigue reports that all of you have submitted. These results are now being communicated at the recurrent ground school and we are waiting for the flight operations department to act on the recommendations to mitigate fatigue in these hotspots.
We would like to highlight again, that any review process of rotations or FDPs by the responsible departments is evidence based only. This means that any “bar talk in Baku” will not be sufficient. It needs the effort of every individual pilot to report fatigue related events to make it tangible and comprehensible.
Due to the significant increase of long duties involving double sector augmented crew operation and operating at the limits of night duties with a standard crew this aspect needs to be reiterated.
We ask you to use the iQSMS application or the LEAF application to submit reports, both are provided on your iPad. When entering the data please be as accurate and as complete as possible. Please click here for additional guidance.
Lately fatigue report closure notes come with the following additional, standardized text:
“Further we would like to remind you that if the fatigue you experienced impacted or could have potentially impacted your ability to perform your flight duties safely, it is according to OMA Chapter 11 Section 2 mandatory to submit an ASR. In doing so you help qualifying and quantifying severe cases of crew fatigue.”
Having to file an ASR on top of the FR in such a case is inconvenient but the issue is hoped to be fixed in the nearer future. In the meantime, filing an ASR (a 72 hours deadline applies!) with reference to the FR code in question (the one to be found in the iQSMS reception confirmation email that is generated shortly after sending the FR) and a brief remark as regards to the “reportable occurrence” character of said FR will be sufficient.
Furthermore, if you are not able to perform a duty due to actual or potential fatigue, please respect OM-A, Chapter 6, Section 1, Crew Health Precautions1, report unfit to fly and write a fatigue report!
1“Crewmembers shall not perform duties on an aircraft:
- When under the influence of psychoactive substances or alcohol or when unfitdue to injury, fatigue, medication, sickness or other similar causes;
- If applicable medical requirements are not fulfilled;
- if he is in any doubt of being able to accomplish his assigned duties;
- if he knows or suspects that he is suffering from fatigue.
Delegation
The continuous delay of the outgoing delegation president, David Massaro, to convene the new delegation is highlighting further the lack of enforceability of laws in Luxembourg. The rights of all employees are weakened when individuals such as David Massaro and the OGB-L interpret the laws to overrule the highest court.
The ALPL delegates of the 2013 elections submitted a request in mid-March for a court referee to intervene to have the outgoing president convene the elected delegates. The initial hearing was set for 23 March where it was no surprise that David Massaro’s legal council asked for a delay. The presiding judge reconvened this hearing to the 29 March after ALPL’s legal council refused to accept the delay.
On 29 March David Massaro and his legal council did not appear for the hearing. Our lawyer was able to explain the situation restating that the judge intervenes and enforces the highest court ruling that the elected delegation of 2013 be convened. Failing that David Massaro ignores this as well, the court then appoints an external person to fulfil this function. The next hearing is scheduled on 5 April 2017.
EASA FTL
Together with our lawyers and the ECA we were able to finalize all the necessary documents to initiate the process, that might result in a law-suit against the Luxembourgish national civil aviation authority DAC. Part of these legal proceedings in administrative court is an arbitration procedure that gives the DAC the possibility to reconsider their interpretation of the disputed clause.
As communicated in previous members updates in our view the concerns brought forward have not been adequately addressed by the authority and the correct interpretation and application of CS FTL.1.235(b)(3)(i) ”Minimum local nights of rest at home base to compensate for time zone differences” will potentially be dealt with in court.
A second document dealing with the back to back operation will follow shortly. After a careful analysis of the law it is our opinion that the way Cargolux applies the EASA back to back provision is not in accordance with mandatory safety rules.
Even in other areas where the DAC openly admits a faulty implementation of the applicable legislation by Cargolux (e.g.: delayed reporting at outstations) the DAC as the responsible oversight authority has in our opinion not kept abreast of Cargolux to apply the regulation correctly. Since this results in rolling delays at outstations and thus in an increase of a already high fatigue level we are monitoring this situation closely as well and are ready to act if necessary.
However, to be realistic we have to manage our expectations. The legal process in Luxembourg is lengthy and slow-paced. The latest legal proceedings regarding the delegation-elections have shown that obtaining a victory in court does not always solve the problem, since Luxembourg apparently lacks the means of enforcing court decisions. Litigation is just one tool in order to achieve our aims on the long run.
FFOD
Although the immobilization of FOD according to the principle agreement in the CWA 37.1.3.c was introduced in roster period 1, there is still no overall agreement between Crew Planning Department/Flight Ops Management and the Pilot Representatives on the final text for the procedure document.
The purpose of this document is to define the immobilization system in more detail, to establish a review procedure and to regulate some special crew planning cases (e.g. part time). The transparent and fully automatic “two group” system offered by ALPL already in 2016 was not agreed by crew planning department, due to their demand to have the sole decision when an FOD becomes an FFOD.
The talks are presently circulating around the attempt to find a solution to monitor the correct application of at least the required CWA principles (5 instances during the first 10 roster periods and equal distribution within the respective pilot group per roster). The next JCSC meeting is planned for the 28 April.
As we come to the end of this month’s update, we are sure that you are seeing a trend that having elements such as application of our CWA and FTL’s are not being respected. We once again ask our members to remain vigilant and not take things for granted.
We as your ALPL Board are working hard to find the best way to enforce our rights and thank you for supporting our guidance.
