The concern was reported by a captain who was concerned that the cabin crew were not given the opportunity to stand down due to fatigue after a flight was diverted.
The reporter expressed a safety concern related to the fatigue experienced by cabin crew and the safety implication for the flight.
The reporter advised that they were the captain of a flight which had to divert to Adelaide due to bad weather. The flight then continued to Melbourne and the flight crew were stood down due to flight and duty limitations. The cabin crew however, were told they would be continuing with the aircraft, which required them to fly over 9.5 hours with a duty time of 15 hours. While acknowledging that crew members always have the option of reporting 'unfit for duty' due to fatigue, there appeared to be no consideration given to the possibility of fatigue being an issue in this case with such a long extended multi-sector duty.
The operator’s management seem to have forgotten that cabin crew are an essential part of the crew for safety purposes and if an emergency had occurred during the latter part of this flight, it is doubtful that the cabin crew would have been able to respond in an appropriate manner to ensure that the passengers safety.
Reporter comment: It is evident that this is a common practice at [operator] and is something that needs to be urgently addressed, both from a safety concern and for duty of care to staff involved in the airline's day to day operations.
We take the fatigue and safety of our cabin crew very seriously.
[Operator] has contractual duty limitations for all its cabin crew, both at a planned stage during the roster build and on an operational basis, in the event of a disrupt.
The rostering system that we operate also has a number of controls imbedded within the system that both prevent rosters being built in excess of these limits and highlight any duties that may be potentially fatiguing (even if within the duty limitations contained within the employment contracts).
In addition, during an operational disrupt, extension of duties are closely monitored with fatigue in mind. The system would also prevent crew being assigned an extension of duty in excess of these duty limitations.
Contained within our policy manual is the overarching Fatigue Risk Management Policy that is applicable to the operations of the airline.
Specifically, the policy states that ‘workers are required to inform [Operator] immediately prior to or during work if they know or suspect that they or another crew member are suffering from levels of fatigue which will prevent duties from being safely conducted.’
Further detail is contained within the Cabin Crew Policy and Procedure Manual. This section contains specific references to the company’s intranet where there is a detailed guide in how to identify, avoid and manage fatigue. All cabin crew must comply with the procedure and have full accessibility to the intranet.
Outlined within in operations manual, it states:
‘If you identify during flight that you are fatigued to the point that your performance is potentially impaired, you must let your CM/CSM know. You should be familiar with the information in the Fatigue Fact Sheets to assist you in understanding your level of fatigue.
In conjunction with your CM/CSM, a decision may be made to provide you with in-flight rest opportunities or look at different mechanisms for managing workload, e.g. one less service or swap positions. Your CMs/CSMs will discuss options with you for managing any safety risk until you reach the next port.
Once you arrive at the port, you should discuss whether offload is still required (if further sectors are rostered) or whether you have achieved suitable rest to be able to continue your duty.’
In addition to the above and more holistically, the cabin crew department at [Operator] has established a Cabin Crew Fatigue Management Working Group to review reports received from cabin crew on duties or rosters that they have reported as fatiguing. This group, which meets at a minimum on a monthly basis, then recommends changes to rostering practices, duty pairings and/or other factors to enable the minimization of fatigue within the cabin crew department. As a result of this working group, a number of duties have been amended to ensure an improved safety outcome for the cabin crew and airline.
CASA has reviewed the REPCON and notes that there are currently no Australian civil aviation regulations governing duty times and rest requirements for cabin crew. The operator’s cabin crew duty limitations are set contractually. While it is reasonable to expect an increased likelihood of fatigue when a multi-sector duty is extended, there was insufficient information to assess the operational safety risks associated with the reported fatigue. For example, factors such as time of day, number of sectors, total duty time, recent sleep history, crew complement, availability of on-board rest will have a bearing on the degree of influence and significance of fatigue on work performance.
Matters regarding cabin crew fatigue are informed by the operator’s Fatigue Risk Management Policy and managed through the organisation’s Cabin Crew Fatigue Management Working Group, which is part of the airline’s Safety Management System (SMS). The crew member should submit a safety report through the SMS. The operator is obliged to consider the content of the reports in the context of the safety of the operation. CASA audits the SMS for effectiveness.
The information provided in the REPCON may be used to inform the next planned audit activity of [the operator’s] cabin crew fatigue management policies and procedures.