1 in 50 FA

Discuss topics relating to Air Canada.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, Sulako, North Shore

Post Reply
Message
Author
zulutime
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:57 pm

1 in 50 FA

#1 Post by zulutime » Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:45 pm

I'm sure there was an earlier post some time ago about this but I coudn't find it in my search. Can anyone confirm if the 1 in 50 rule has been approved by our government allowing Air Canada to eliminate 1 FA on some flights?
---------- ADS -----------
  

bcflyer
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1142
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 8:35 am
Location: Canada

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#2 Post by bcflyer » Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:56 pm

It's been approved in Canada for a long time. Jazz has been 1-50 since at least 2000
---------- ADS -----------
  

DHC-1 Jockey
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 388
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:41 pm

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#3 Post by DHC-1 Jockey » Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:07 pm

We're even allowed to operate 1 FA on the Q400 and 705 if the pax loads outbound and inbound are both less than 50.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
CD
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2728
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:13 pm
Location: Canada

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#4 Post by CD » Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:31 pm

DHC-1 Jockey wrote:We're even allowed to operate 1 FA on the Q400 and 705 if the pax loads outbound and inbound are both less than 50.
The 705 could likely be operated with 1 FA and 40 passengers as it has only one pair of floor level exits but would need a second FA at 41 passengers. I thought the Q400 would have 2 FAs at all times as it has two pairs of floor level exits. See CAR 705.104 and CASS 725.41.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Gilles Hudicourt
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1983
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
Location: YUL

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#5 Post by Gilles Hudicourt » Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:49 pm

To be clear, for the time being, the CARs do not yet allow 1:50, it's still 1:40.
Flight Attendant Requirements
705.104 (1) Subject to subsection (3), no air operator
shall operate an aircraft with passengers on board unless
the crew includes at least the following number of flight
attendants:
(a) 1 to 40 passengers on board, one attendant;
(b) 41 to 80 passengers on board, two attendants; and
(c) 81 or more passengers on board, one attendant for
each unit of 40 passengers or portion thereof.
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), no air operator
shall operate an aircraft with passengers on board with
fewer flight attendants than the number required to satisfy
the following requirements:
(a) the air operator shall, for each type and model of
aircraft that it operates, assign to each flight attendant
the duties to be performed in an emergency, including
an emergency evacuation, and shall show that the performance
of those duties adequately meets any emergency
that may be reasonably anticipated, including
the possible incapacitation of another flight attendant;
and
(b) the air operator shall ensure that the duties assigned
pursuant to paragraph (a) are described in its
company operations manual.
(3) An air operator may operate an aircraft with passengers
on board with a crew that includes fewer than
the minimum number of flight attendants required by
subsection (1), if the air operator
(a) is authorized to do so in its air operator certificate;
and
(b) complies with the Commercial Air Service Standards.
(4) Where an aircraft has more than one deck, the
number of flight attendants on each deck shall be in accordance
with subsections (1) and (2).
Those airlines that do 1:50 were granted a ministerial exemption (waiver) to the rule.

Here is Westjet's exemption :

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... n/2278.htm

I just searched the TC exemption database and found none concerning 705.104 for Air Canada.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DBC
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:29 pm

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#6 Post by DBC » Wed Jul 09, 2014 4:14 am

Last I heard we were still operating under the old rules and the company is currently working with TC to get 1:50.
---------- ADS -----------
  

zulutime
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#7 Post by zulutime » Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:20 pm

DBC wrote:Last I heard we were still operating under the old rules and the company is currently working with TC to get 1:50.
OK Thx. Someone thought they heard on the news yesterday that AC had been granted the 1:50. Since I hadn't heard that directly I thought I would ask if anyone else was aware of this ruling. Seems, for now at least, it's just rumour. I would imagine it is only a matter of time though.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Gilles Hudicourt
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1983
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
Location: YUL

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#8 Post by Gilles Hudicourt » Wed Jul 09, 2014 6:17 pm

This news item seems to confirm that AC obtained the exemption

https://cupe.ca/node/33096
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
CD
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2728
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:13 pm
Location: Canada

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#9 Post by CD » Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:42 am

CUPE files Federal Court challenge on Air Canada exemption from safety regulation

OTTAWA, ONTARIO--(Marketwired - Aug. 8, 2014) - CUPE is challenging a Transport Canada decision to exempt Air Canada from maintaining the current ratio of one flight attendant for every 40 passenger seats on the airlines flights. CUPE, the union representing over 7,000 flight attendants at Air Canada, says the exemption is illegal, and has filed a legal challenge with the Federal Court to have the exemption quashed.

"This exemption is clearly not in the best safety and security interests of Canadian passengers and it must be overturned," said Michel Cournoyer, president of CUPE's Airline Division. "Fewer flight attendants means more risks for passengers. We're confident the courts will see this simple fact."

CUPE has asked the Federal Court for a judicial review of Transport Canada's decision to grant the exemption to Air Canada. CUPE will argue that the exemption is illegal because the criteria set out in the Aeronautics Act for granting such an exemption were ignored by Transport Canada.

"In any emergency situation, like an evacuation, fire, cabin decompression, a disruptive passenger or a terrorist attack, flight attendants are the first line of defence when things go wrong on an aircraft," said Cournoyer. "Reducing the number of flight attendants on board by increasing the ratio to one flight attendant for every 50 passenger seats, as Transport Canada intends, is a threat to passenger safety and security."

Since 1999, CUPE has successfully argued to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Transport and to Transport ministers that regulatory changes to the ratio of one flight attendant for every 40 passenger seats would reduce the current levels of safety and security and is not in the public interest. The exemption granted to Air Canada is an improper way of circumventing the regulatory process to avoid public scrutiny on this important safety issue.

"Bending to airline industry pressures to reduce the number of flight attendants for the sake of increasing profits is inexcusable," said Cournoyer. "The threat this exemption poses is undeniable, and when the Federal Court recognizes this, the Conservative government should do the right thing and keep one flight attendant for every 40 passenger seats as the standard ratio for all Canadian airlines."

CUPE represents more than 10,000 flight attendants employed by Air Canada, Air Transat, Calm Air, Canadian North, Canjet, Cathay Pacific, First Air and Sun Wing.
---------- ADS -----------
  

snag
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 11:00 am

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#10 Post by snag » Fri Aug 08, 2014 6:48 pm

Rouge flights on the 319 (about 140 pax) now operate with 3 FA's under the 1:50 rule.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Mechmike
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:52 pm

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#11 Post by Mechmike » Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:59 pm

http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2015/ ... -14912.pdf

@page 175...since the new regulations have been published last week in the gazette does this apply to all companies?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Gilles Hudicourt
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1983
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:51 am
Location: YUL

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#12 Post by Gilles Hudicourt » Sat Jun 27, 2015 6:08 am

I did a very quick reading of the Gazette:
I may be wrong, but from what I understood:

1 in 50 is now the law for private operators of large aircraft, ie John Travolta's Boeing 707.

1 in 50 is now the law for 705 Operated 50 seaters or less

1 in 40 is still the norm for aircraft of more than 50 seats operated under 705, except that 1 in 40 is available to those who apply for it after demonstrating an evacuation with less than 1 in 40.

Before, this required a Ministerial Exemption after the demonstration. Now the Ministerial Exemption has been taken out of the loop, the 1 in 50 process is legislated into the CARs. The demonstration is still required, they seem to have just made it easier to obtain, without the constraints associated with issuing Ministerial exemptions, which had to go through a process listed here:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ka093zin97tlz ... l.pdf?dl=0
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by Gilles Hudicourt on Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
CD
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2728
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 5:13 pm
Location: Canada

Re: 1 in 50 FA

#13 Post by CD » Sat Jun 27, 2015 11:23 am

Looks like the choice is open for either ratio in 705:
Minimum Number of Flight Attendants

705.201
(1) No air operator shall operate an aeroplane to carry passengers unless the air operator does so with the minimum number of flight attendants required on each deck.

(2) Subject to subsections (4) to (7), the minimum number of flight attendants required on each deck of an aeroplane is determined in accordance with one of the following ratios that is selected by the air operator in respect of the model of that aeroplane:

(a) one flight attendant for each unit of 40 passengers or for each portion of such a unit; or
(b) one flight attendant for each unit of 50 passenger seats or for each portion of such a unit.

Regulations Amending the Canadian Aviation Regulations (Parts I, VI and VII — Flight Attendants and Emergency Evacuation)
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Air Canada”