Four cabin crew suspended after walking off plane

[timel]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/trave ... z3Slvyv8w2


Any thoughts on that? I guess there is work to be done on CRM.

[godsrcrazy]

Oh my god. Who does the Captain think he is to disobey the cabin crew. What would the Captain know about snow and ice on the wings and fusealge let alone the deice procedures.

[Notta Simfalt]

The article doesn't say anything about deicing or not. If they just thought it was bad wx, that's shortsighted. They would have got off before the deicing. I suspect that the deicing was done properly and then they departed. A few more details will have to come out.

[BE82]

ohh boy!! as far as i am concerned FA's should MELable. and the only icing concern they should be able to express is when the bag is empty! .

in all seriousness some of them really think they are in charge, and their willingness to fly is directly related to their mood and whether or not her bf is at home.

[hst]

Having personal experience with this Captain I can certainly vouch for his professionalism, integrity and CRM skills. IMO, the local cabin crew wanted a snow day and challenged him when they didn't get the desired response. Their stance will likely cost them their jobs, as it should.

[airway]

"cabin staff were reportedly involved in a heated argument with the pilot"

I'm hoping the "pilot" was able to remain calm.

Let's say you are boarding, and the in-charge flight attendant comes to the flight deck and says she is concerned about the amount of snow on the wings, and is it safe to take off when it is snowing like this. (lets assume your aircraft is certified for the rate of snowfall, your hold over time is good, and you feel comfortable with this).

I would tell her it is safe, and why, in detail if necessary.

If she comes back and says that she and 3 other flight attendants still do not think it is safe and refuse to fly, I would tell her, OK, I will call the company and see what they want to do. I would also call my manager.

I would also advise her to call her manager, and her union rep.

I know this scenario could play out in a thousand different ways, but this is what I would do in this specific one.

[Johnny#5]

That's giving them too much power.

FA's...

[ahramin]

Very well said Airway. If someone has a safety concern, our job is to deal with it.

Anyone who feels a pilot's job includes thinking and showing how much better pilots are than FAs is failing.

[Captain S itmagnet]

Here's a novel idea. Our SOPs state that "the most conservative course of action shall be taken".
Keep everyone happy and get deiced (or repeat the procedure if that was the case). By-product is any insinuation of a "snow day" plan by any crewmember gets flushed down the lav as a result. And fwiw the Captain and paying passengers get what they want by having a fully crewed flight.

My boss pays for deicing, not me

[Bede]

Captain S itmagnet,

Yeah, the most conservative course of action amongst people who are knowledgeable on the subject. FA's are to bring concerns to the captain; that doesn't give them veto power over deice, MEL, go/no go, granny gas, etc.

And we wonder why our command authority is diminishing. ..

[timel]

It is surprising the captain was not able to inspire confidence, half of his crew felt it was not safe to come along.
They probably knew the consequences for leaving, it is quite a drastic decision and yes the story is not complete, I agree.

From what I observed, most FAs seem to have great respect and trust in the captain judgement/knowledge. Maybe it is not the case everywhere.

It is important to acknowledge the informations provided by FAs and not diminish the work they do.

I agree with you Airway, well said.

[Batman]

If this had of been Westjet the F/A's would have been given a huge dose of kudos and the Captain would have been fired.

[Stu Pidasso]

CRM is not a "democracy," Cabin Crew are encouraged to raise any concerns and the Pilot In Command (in consultation with the other Pilots) will decide the course of action.

If you struggle with this concept, you are in the wrong Profession.

[True North]

If this had of been Westjet the F/A's would have been given a huge dose of kudos and the Captain would have been fired.

Aww, Batman need a hug?

[Batman]

ya ok I'll take it but no grinding.

[Rookie50]

I am not a pilot carrying commercial passengers on a transport category aircraft, but my question (at least in my head) -- after listening to the concern and addressing --- would be -- "what part of PILOT IN COMMAND -- don't you understand?

I believe there is room for exactly one. It's not a democracy.

And perhaps I don't understand the industry well -- but why would I call the company to make a command decision I can make myself -- unless as a mediation tool?

Unless safety was shown definitively to be breached FA's should be fired.

[Rockie]

"pilot in command" means you are responsible. It does not mean you rule the aircraft like you were Josef Stalin. Everybody on the airplane has a stake in arriving safely and everybody on the airplane is capable of pointing out something the left seat God may have missed.

Believe it or not it is possible to exercise effective command and still incorporate all the crew members in the decision making process - and even show them they are incorrect without alienating them.

[Stu Pidasso]

A recent story from closer to home, now these F/A's should be fired ! A 787 Flight cancelled because; "The Monkeys Run The Zoo."




Members
Pip
8 posts


Posted 26 February 2015 - 08:46 PM


What makes any one think there is no oil in the compressor bearings for the '87? Even though electrically driven, there are still bearings in there. The switch away from bleed air has nothing to do with cabin air safety, but is about saving fuel…pneumatically driven anything is not an efficient transfer of energy.

I was involved recently in an event that the crew refused to work the flight, which was subsequently cancelled.

We had just delivered the aircraft to the gate from a parking area where the heater and ground power unit had been running at max output with both diesel exhausts upwind of the heater intake. The mtc personnel riding brakes did not detect anything unusual but the flight attendants seemed particularly sensitive to a "smell" We vented the cabin and ran both engines (due to their stated concern regarding oils fumes) supplying the packs with no further apparent smell to us as mtc, but the crew walked off, citing "right to refuse unsafe work". Transport Canada and Labour Canada got involved but could detect no toxins or unusual smells during air quality tests.

After losing a day’s revenue, I signed the aircraft back into service with no subsequent complaints, after running the packs from both APU and engines for some time. At no point could I smell anything unusual, other than a trace of diesel exhaust during the initial vent.

It seems there may be some hysteria regarding "fume events" and chronic exposure to TCP that will only get worse. I’ve read all the posts on PPrune from the above link. It is perplexing the lack of understanding regarding how air gets into the cabin, but the many "experts" on the effects of organophosphate “poisoning”.

In my experience, there are three distinct, external sources of smells that the cabin crew does not have the experience to distinguish…the classic “dirty socks” through-out the cabin, which is engine oil past seals, ….vehicle or aircraft exhaust that may temporarily get into the air supply, from which there is no avoiding (electric or engine driven compressors), but also no apparent harm greater than walking down a city street…and the “sweet” smell which I believe is type 4 de-icing fluid sucked into the apu intake during taxi. Any-one noticed the green rivers running back along the belly to the tail following a flight? My point is that without some form of oversight and common sense, every smell may soon turn into a “fume event”.

I'm not arguing that there is no harm. I'm saying we don't know. The regulating bodies don't or can’t test for these fumes. We, as mtc can't detect anything with our noses except for a significant leak...at which point we would not put the aircraft into service.

We (as mtc) practically bathe in engine oil, and sit in the cockpit during fume event “burn outs”, a process where we will run the packs at full hot for several hours following a complaint of “dirty socks” smell, (and, probably) following an engine or apu change initiated by an “event”. We could argue our exposure may be higher to TCP.

In my experience, the proper servicing of APUs has decreased legitimate fume events significantly, but the un-studied, uninformed, are taking their concerns to a level that will cause a serious conflict with management

[Stu Pidasso]

I am not a pilot carrying commercial passengers on a transport category aircraft, but my question (at least in my head) -- after listening to the concern and addressing --- would be -- "what part of PILOT IN COMMAND -- don't you understand?

I believe there is room for exactly one. It's not a democracy.

And perhaps I don't understand the industry well -- but why would I call the company to make a command decision I can make myself -- unless as a mediation tool?

Unless safety was shown definitively to be breached FA's should be fired.

In 2015 it works like this Rookie50; "The Pilot in Command has ALL the Responsibility and NONE of the Authority."

Right up until something serious happens; then the Dispatcher hides under his desk, the Air Traffic Controller runs for cover and all fingers point to the Pilot in Command.

It is all a function of political correctness where we are all equal, even if you are clueless about the issue. In this case Licenced, Educated and highly trained AME's said the Aircraft was okay - some F/A's determined the flight would be cancelled.

[Rookie50]

I am not a pilot carrying commercial passengers on a transport category aircraft, but my question (at least in my head) -- after listening to the concern and addressing --- would be -- "what part of PILOT IN COMMAND -- don't you understand?

I believe there is room for exactly one. It's not a democracy.

And perhaps I don't understand the industry well -- but why would I call the company to make a command decision I can make myself -- unless as a mediation tool?

Unless safety was shown definitively to be breached FA's should be fired.

In 2015 it works like this Rookie50; "The Pilot in Command has ALL the Responsibility and NONE of the Authority."

Right up until something serious happens; then the Dispatcher hides under his desk, the Air Traffic Controller runs for cover and all fingers point to the Pilot in Command.

It is all a function of political correctness where we are all equal, even if you are clueless about the issue. In this case Licenced, Educated and highly trained AME's said the Aircraft was okay - some F/A's determined the flight would be cancelled.

That was my point (Rockie) It's not about being a dictator or a jerk. It's the danger (I've read it elsewhere, too) of final decision making, AFTER discussion / concern resolving, which is legitimate, being removed from the PIC and placed elsewhere, or by consensus.

I think it's OK for an FA to bring up a concern -- to a point. When the concern has been well covered, (and hopefully in agreement with the FO) that's where FA's need to trust in their Captains judgement. Otherwise they need to question their chosen occupation.

As I said I'm not in the business. I do fly light airplanes and have had the opposite issue, being pressured to fly by Pax. I exercised PIC and said no (weather).

Guess it's simpler for me.

[Stu Pidasso]

Sadly ( in my experience ) the majority of Captains at large Airlines have completely 'tuned out' and 'given up.' The system has beat them down and they occupy (physically) the Left Seat but are afraid of confrontation.

All they care about is getting out the door on Pension, we are paid 'by the minute' ....do what you like, I could care less.

Pathetic!

[Rockie]

In 2015 it works like this Rookie50; "The Pilot in Command has ALL the Responsibility and NONE of the Authority."

That is certainly the way our airline wants it to be, but it will only be that way if you let it. Responsibility does more than imply authority - it demands it, and no policies written in the FOM can change that. But that doesn't mean indiscriminate or absolute authority either.

[True North]

Sadly ( in my experience ) the majority of Captains at large Airlines have completely 'tuned out' and 'given up.' The system has beat them down and they occupy (physically) the Left Seat but are afraid of confrontation.

All they care about is getting out the door on Pension, we are paid 'by the minute' ....do what you like, I could care less.

Pathetic!

I don't know where you work but I know a lot of pilots at various "major" airlines and not one of them fits your description.

I'm not sure where this thread is going anyway. The FAs chose to walk off the a/c. I have no doubt the captain explained the situation but they made their choice anyway. I don't know what any captain could do to prevent that. It's the FAs that face the consequences now not the captain.