Cargolux

We welcome Management´s decision to discontinue CGO layovers with immediate effect!

After having commenced these layovers in early November, it became apparent that Chinese authorities demanded additional requirements and did not follow the initially agreed procedures with the Company.
 
In this context, we would like to thank those crewmembers for their effort in writing safety reports and to provide us with detailed and valuable information about the deficiencies in the immigration procedure and hotel standard. In addition, there were many unanswered questions about the lack of emergency plans in the event a crewmember would become sick or show Covid symptoms during a layover in CGO.
 
All this useful information from the involved crewmembers formed the basis of a letter that was sent to management on Monday, 8 November 2021. Please click here to read this letter.
 
We consider the decision to discontinue the layovers in CGO as a strong signal by Management that safety and health of the pilots have top priority.

The layovers in CGO have commenced a few days ago and meanwhile it became obvious that the reality does not reflect what has been communicated to us as Pilot Representatives and to all pilots in the latest Flight Crew Advisory. Many colleagues have already filed a report mentioning in particular the following deficiencies:

• Significant waiting times of up to 3 hours for the immigration process
• PCR testing of a crew member who recovered from COVID-19 already in 2020
• Medical interrogation via Google Translate, subject to potential translation errors
• Lack of a procedure in case somebody is tested positive
• Significantly reduced rest quality due to high temperature in the room and unreliable times for room service and empty minibar

The mismatch between what has been communicated from Management and what actually happens in reality is unprecedented and unacceptable.

We urge you to continue filing Voyage and Air Safety Reports and to report it to the company. Please also send a copy of these reports to cvboard@alpl.lu.

As already communicated in our October Members Update, the DAC approved a derogation from ORO.FTL.235(b) regarding the use of aircraft onboard rest under certain conditions during COVID-19. The DAC refers to this as “unplanned on board layover”.
 
Recently one of our members informed us, that the Duty and Rest times for the part of the crew that didn’t operate the sector immediately following such an “unplanned on board layover” and therefore had no access to the class 1 rest facility of the aircraft during the “unplanned on board layover”, were applied in an unsatisfactory way.
 
In order to get clarification from the competent authority we contacted the DAC asking how the Duty Time and the Minimum Rest Period are to be calculated. Please click here to view the letter sent to the DAC.
 
In its reply the DAC clearly states that for the part of the crew that does not have access to class 1 rest facilities and positions on the subsequent sector, all time spent onboard is considered as Duty Time and consequently counts towards all Duty Time Limits. The Duty Time for a pilot who positions immediately following the application of the “unplanned on board layover” can therefore easily exceed 24 hours (in our example close to 30 hours) and could have a considerable impact on the Duty Time limit of 60 hours within any seven consecutive days.
 
Consequently, and as confirmed by the DAC, the Minimum Rest Period following such an “unplanned on board layover” shall be as long as the previous Duty Period, counting from the Reporting Time for the Flight Duty Period immediately preceding the “unplanned on board layover” until the end of the Duty Period immediately following the “unplanned on board layover”.
 
Please note that this does NOT apply to the operating crew of the “second” sector who have access to the class 1 rest facility while on the ground duringthe “unplanned on board layover”. As per the derogation granted by the DAC, this time is considered as rest period.
 
The authorization granted by the DAC allows Cargolux to derogate from ORO.FTL.235 (b) but it does not exempt Cargolux from calculating the Duty Times and Minimum Rest Periods as per the CWA!
 
Consequently, these Duty hours must be taken into consideration when calculating the Duty Period limits as per CWA Art. 36.4.1, the minimum Rest Periods as per CWA Art. 36.10.1 and the overtime calculation as per CWA Art. 38.5. As it seems that this was not the case, a letter was sent to Senior Management regarding this non-compliance with the CWA.
 
In the meantime, we ask you to please refer to the reply by the DAC or contact us at cvboard@alpl.lu if you encounter any further discrepancy or have any questions.

On Wednesday 03 November 2021 an amendment to the CWA was signed by the Company and both Unions. 

Since the Company implemented the Jeppesen Roster Planning Tool many of our members complained about their published rosters and in particular that the success rate of Off- Day requests changed dramatically compared to the times before this new software was used.

Unfortunately, the present CWA, like all previous ones, does not include much about requests for Off- Days, other than what is mentioned in Art. 36.16.1 j). Requesting trips or specific destinations is not covered at all and the “PBS” is nothing more than what these three letters stand for, a Preferential Bidding System. The missing details of how rosters are being built applying a seniority based Preferential Bidding System is certainly an important topic, which should be included in a CWA.

Also, in the context of rostering, a few members reported that the Company unilaterally decided to implement a dead-line until which a pilot could request to have the “2 for 1” compensation for A- and B- Days or the “1 for 1” compensation for C- Days in the next unpublished roster period. The CWA did not include any deadline for these requests in the past and a pilot could request the “2 for 1” and “1 for 1” compensation until the minute before the next roster period was published. 

Considering the importance to address the problems which surfaced with the implementation of the Jeppesen Roster Planning Tool and that having a dead-line for the “2 for 1” and “1 for 1” compensation requests might be in our interest as well to prevent subsequent roster disruptions of other pilots  after initial roster publication, we suggested to the Company to bundle both issues in an amendment of the CWA, the one which was signed today.

The amendment of Art. 36.16.2 and 36.16.3 includes now clear rules until when a pilot must inform the company about his or her choice to compensate for Off- Days, the communication method and to which department the request shall be sent to (Crew Control). It also includes additional text to reflect the changes of the Duty Sheets, which were implemented earlier this year after consultation of the Delegation. This was necessary to be in line with Luxembourgish Labour Law and to avoid double compensation in certain cases.

At the same time Art. 36.20 Preferential Bidding System was added to the CWA. This article gives us as your Representatives the ability to engage in discussions with the Crew Planning Department to jointly define and review PBS key performance indicators with the focus on balancing the quality of life for the Pilots. These discussions include the following important topics:

• how the existing request options for Off-Days could be expanded and if options to request layover destinations and/or Rotations could be made available,
• how pilot seniority is considered when awarding requests for Off-Days, layover destinations and/or Rotations,
• an acceptable request award rate,
• how and over which time-period the workload is distributed evenly and fairly between the Pilots while always managing fatigue,
• how roster stability can be increased.

The Amendment to the Collective Work Agreement can be viewed here. A consolidated online version of the CWA reflecting these amendments is available for download here.

As communicated earlier, until now we had no influence on the rostering process, since it was simply not covered by the CWA. This amendment is a big achievement towards a permanent involvement of Pilot Representatives in defining the parameters of the PBS in the future.

Given the importance rostering has for each pilot, we concluded finding an agreement with the Company sooner than later would be the only reliable way to have your interests in this important topic represented. The other option would have been to address this issue in the next CWA negotiations, which would most likely not be concluded before the end of next year.

Keep in mind that this article does not provide an instant solution for the current rostering issues, as it is a very complex matter. We need to collect solid data to identify the exact areas where improvement is needed before we can start working on an actual solution. To get the most accurate data, we urge all of you to fill out the PBS survey, which we publish each month after roster publication. This will help us to act in your best interest.

Recently the company has announced in a Chief Pilot Office update as well as in a Flight Crew Advisory the reintroduction of layovers in CGO, where in-room confinement will be mandated.
 
In recent weeks and months, we have received many complaints regarding the OVB-CGO-ANC flights, where crews felt that they were pushed into commander’s discretion due to the long turnaround times in CGO and unrealistically planned flight times, as well as the OVB-CGO-OVB shuttles. These problems should disappear with the introduction of layovers in CGO.
 
In a meeting with Pilot Representatives, it was mentioned by the CEO, that the company only considered introducing layovers in CGO, after the problems related to the unpredictable turnaround times in PVG and CGO became apparent, which may be further aggravated by the upcoming winter operations.
 
At the same time, we acknowledge that the return flight from the PVG shuttles will now be scheduled to KUL, eliminating some layovers in BKK.
 
According to Luxemburgish law, it is the obligation of an employer to guarantee the health and safety of all employees, and it is fact that excessive time spent in in-room confinement poses a risk to a pilot’s physical and mental health.
 
We sent a separate letter to the CEO to address these issues, mentioning among other things that we expect management to keep up to its commitment to plan layovers in CGO for not longer than 28 hours. We also expect that the company continues to work together with the Chinese authorities to organize the previously mentioned blocked floors as well as a gym usable for crews. You can read this letter here.
 
As the currently planned hotel for the layovers in CGO is not the same, which we used before the pandemic, it goes without saying that the quality of rest in the new hotel must be such that the crews are able to recover well enough from the previous duty in order to be sufficiently rested before the next FDP. Should this not be the case, please file a Voyage Report or even an ASR and send a copy to cvhotels@alpl.lu.
 
In the aforementioned letter we clearly expressed that we expect management to review the CGO layovers together with Pilot Representatives after a trial period of 4 weeks and to discuss actual layover times, the quality of the hotel as well as other possible problems regarding layovers in CGO.

Faced with fierce in-room confinement in Bangkok for such a long time, we all are craving for more freedom and normality while on a layover there. In recent months rumours of other airline crews being exempted from the restrictions in Bangkok arose regularly and led to a certain frustration amongst all Cargolux pilots, simply because everyone felt left alone in our Bangkok dilemma.
 
Your ALPL Board regularly investigated these rumours only to find out that official information from the Thai authorities concerning crews is rare, sometimes contradicting and incomplete. It appears, that in room confinement still is mandatory, even for vaccinated crews. Please click here to read the latest letter that was sent to management concerning the layover situation in Bangkok.
 
In our recent vaccination survey, we tried to get a better picture of the vaccination status of our colleagues. According to the feedback we received, roughly 91% of the pilots indicate to be vaccinated. This knowledge will allow us to make informed decisions in the event of any future operational changes in connection with the COVID-19 vaccination rate.
 
In this context, some colleagues have raised their concerns that the company would only send vaccinated pilots to destinations like Bangkok with in-room confinement, whilst unvaccinated colleagues would be able to enjoy trips with less restrictions or no restrictions at all. 
 
To make it clear, it is the firm position of your ALPL Board that this would not be acceptable and could lead to serious conflicts amongst the pilots. Management informed us that this is not intended.
 
Finally, we would like to point out once again that a even higher vaccination rate amongst the pilots could support our case and accelerate the process to have those restrictions we currently see in Bangkok and other places being lifted. 

Please find below an update concerning:

• Crew rest onboard an aircraft during COVID-19
• Index Increase as of 01 October 2021
• Letter regarding repeated failure of cybersecurity testing

Crew rest onboard an aircraft during COVID-19
Article 71 (2) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 allows air carriers to request derogations from their competent authority during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to updates from the Chief Pilots Office, Cargolux has received authorisation to derogate from ORO.FTL.235 (b) and to use inflight rest facilities onboard, provided certain conditions are fulfilled. 

With the latest changes in China and the long turnaround times due to the local COVID restrictions, the risk to run out of duty time and being forced to use the onboard rest facilities is significantly increased. Some colleagues also doubted that this derogation can be applied in case of unforeseen loading delays. 

In a FSAG meeting in mid-September 2021, the existence and validity of such derogation was verbally confirmed by one of the inspectors of the DAC. Subsequently, the Delegation decided to send a letter to the EVP Flight Operations with the request to make the authorisation and derogation request more transparent. Please click on below links to read the respective letters.

Letter from the Delegation
Reply letter from the EVP Flight Operations
Letter from the Delegation with the request to amend the OM-A accordingly

We would like to underscore the importance to file a VR any time the use of Commander´s Discretion was necessary to complete a FDP. This is mandatory as per OM-A, Chapter 7, Section 8. In this context it is also important to know that in OM-A, Chapter 7, Section 10, performance indicators are defined to monitor the robustness of rostered pairings and rosters. E.g. it is mentioned that in case the actual FDP in operation exceeds the maximum FDP on more than 33% of the flights during a scheduled season, Cargolux must change the schedule and/or the crewing arrangements.

Index Increase as of 01 October 2021
According to the provisional result published by STATEC, the annual inflation rate of the national consumer price index (CPI) amounts to 2.7% for the month of September. With this result, the half-yearly average of the index linked to the 1.1.1948 base for the month of September exceeds the threshold of 895.78 points, thus triggering a new indexation.

The new index of 855.62 (old index: 834.76) came into force on 01 October 2021, resulting in a salary increase of 2.5%.  

Letter regarding repeated failure of cybersecurity testing
Recently, some employees have received a letter from HR due to repeated failure of responding correctly to cybersecurity testing. The letter also included a threat of disciplinary consequences should this happen again.

Those tests are done by the IT Department and consist of false phishing emails, which must be treated by the employee accordingly.

As all employees, not only pilots, are affected by these tests, the issue will be handled by the Delegation. We already requested a legal opinion if it is permissible under Luxembourg’s labor law for an employer to set up such a test or trap for the employees.

Generally, we disapprove procedures of artificial traps that are being applied. In the meantime, we recommend to remove the Cargolux email account from all private devices and not to use any private device to access Cargolux related websites. We also recommend using the company provided iPad only for any duty related tasks and to only switch it on when required, e.g. before starting a Duty Period. Please click here to read the iPad policy for more information.

We also recommend to forward any email you think could be a spam or phishing attempt to cybersec@cargolux.com for verification.

Vacation together with our off-days have a high priority especially for us as pilots and are an important building block for a healthy work-life balance. With a stronger focus of the company on more efficient planning and the endeavour to achieve a higher level of automation in the planning process, we already noticed last year problems with the allocation of vacation days.

To better evaluate the success rate of the vacation allocation for 2022 we need your support!

With a survey after each bidding round (first, second and VOFF) we plan to collect important information to improve the allocation process in the future. What is particularly important in this context is whether the bids were placed as “fixed” or “flexible” dates to evaluate the intention behind them and the results.

Therefore, we would like to ask for your individual vacation bidding and allocation results and to answer a few questions. This survey is now the first of three surveys, which covers the recent publication of the vacation days of the first bidding round.

Please note, this survey will be held in strict confidentiality – only the overall results will be communicated.

To view the contained table in full size, we recommend filling out the survey on a computer, notebook or tablet. 

The survey closes on 17 October 2021.

Your ALPL Vacation Committee

Thank you very much for participating in the vote in which 88,3 % of our members stated their individual preference.
 
The vote consisted of the following question:
 
Do you accept the proposal for a deviation for scheduled operations and agree to operate with a crew compliment of 1 Captain and 3 First Officers under the presented conditions? 
 
YES: 31,7%                 (BC: 32,1%; FO: 31,4%)
 
NO: 68,3%                  (BC: 67,9%; FO: 68,6%)
  
With 68,3% voting “NO”, the deviation request has been rejected by our members. The Pilot Representatives will not agree to the proposed deviation as requested by management. This  has been communicated to senior management.