Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
WS Gets 1:50 FA Exception From Transport Canada  
User currently offlineYYZatcboy From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1069 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2688 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2...o_use_fewer_flight_attendants.html

Westjet suceeded in convincing Transport Canada to allow them to use a 1:50 seat ration vs a 1:40 pax ratio, giving an estimated savings of 30 million dollars.

As usual the union and opposition party firmly put reason aside in favour of the political realities that allow them to continue to exist.

Thoughts?


DHC1/3/4 MD11/88 L1011 A319/20/21/30 B727 735/6/7/8/9 762/3 E175/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150. J/S DH8D 736/7/8
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBureaucromancer From Canada, joined Feb 2010, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2578 times:

What relevance does any union have to this? WJ is non-union, and to my understanding there has yet to be any serious push for it. Of course anyone associated with Air Canada is going to complain, but I see no reason they shouldn't be able to get this permission themselves. In fact the story linked claims that Transport Canada intends to make the change generally themselves.

User currently offlineCdnCactus From Canada, joined Mar 2013, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2560 times:

Just wondering: have there ever been any studies done to see what's the optimal FA/pax ratio to facilitate the quickest emergency evacuation?

User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2290 times:

Believe AC has a limited waiver for the CRJ200s, which seat exactly 50.


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4913 posts, RR: 43
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1984 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 3):
Believe AC has a limited waiver for the CRJ200s, which seat exactly 50.

They did when they operated the aircraft, but no longer.

But it usually went with two anyway, as per the ACPPA one had to be bilingual, and if the Purser wasn't BL, then an additional F/A had to be added. Equal playing field? Uh huh.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineRoseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9503 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1953 times:

Quoting CdnCactus (Reply 2):
Just wondering: have there ever been any studies done to see what's the optimal FA/pax ratio to facilitate the quickest emergency evacuation?

Conventional wisdom is that more is better.

However, when the FAA and EASA allow a ratio of 1 FA to 50 seats, it’s hard to see why Transport Canada is only allowing 1 to 40. They have to have a good reason to limit it to 1 in 40 and anecdotal evidence by a union that more is better isn’t going to work trying to convince a regulator.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlinenorthstardc4m From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2992 posts, RR: 37
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1918 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 3):
Believe AC has a limited waiver for the CRJ200s, which seat exactly 50.

Dash 8-300 as well, also exactly 50 seaters... I remember Air Ontario's pre-exemption, the 2nd FA never seemed to have much to do except sit in the back fold away.



Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
User currently onlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24868 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1892 times:

KL often has 3 flight attendants on 100-seat E-190s. Not sure if that's standard but there were 3 on a KL E-190 AMS-GVA last week. Always 2 on 80-seat Fokker 70s.

LX has 2 on 97-seat Avro RJ100s.


User currently offlinelonghauler From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 4913 posts, RR: 43
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1841 times:

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 5):
However, when the FAA and EASA allow a ratio of 1 FA to 50 seats, it’s hard to see why Transport Canada is only allowing 1 to 40. They have to have a good reason to limit it to 1 in 40 and anecdotal evidence by a union that more is better isn’t going to work trying to convince a regulator.

FAA requires 1 F/A per 50 seats, while Transport Canada requires 1 F/A per 40 passengers. So in many cases LESS F/A's are carried per Transport Canada requirements than FAA requirements. That is down to a minimum which varies per type and door arrangement.

For example, consider a B767-300, or A330-300 with 120 passengers as an equipment sub.

T/C requires 3 F/As on the B767 and 4 on the A330.
Using FAA rules, with our seating arrangement, it would be 5 F/As on the B767 and 6 on the A330!!!

As the events in Canada over the last few years have shown, unions have no pull with the government.



Never gonna grow up, never gonna slow down .... Barefoot Blue Jean Night
User currently offlineYYZatcboy From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1069 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1839 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Agreed. It only makes sense if your flights are mostly full.


DHC1/3/4 MD11/88 L1011 A319/20/21/30 B727 735/6/7/8/9 762/3 E175/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150. J/S DH8D 736/7/8
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic WS Gets 1:50 FA Exception From Transport Canada
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Transport Canada To Trinidad And Tobago Conversion posted Sun Dec 5 2010 19:59:05 by BWIA330
Transport Canada -> FAA License posted Wed Apr 24 2002 03:16:04 by AA_Cam
PPL Flying From USA To Canada posted Sat Oct 11 2003 04:18:21 by RayBolt
Air Canada 747-400 Routes posted Sat Apr 27 2013 18:24:16 by callegro
Cockpits With A Step Up Or Down From The Door posted Thu Apr 11 2013 21:36:29 by 1337Delta764
VHF Comm 400-600 Miles From Land? posted Mon Mar 18 2013 10:19:13 by timz
Air Canada FIN705 Status posted Mon Feb 18 2013 08:55:11 by Q400
How In Depth Are The Language Tests For DL FA's? posted Sun Feb 10 2013 04:03:09 by cvg2lga
Dirty Exhaust From Engines, Just Old? posted Sat Feb 9 2013 07:03:36 by smartt1982
Aircraft Boarding From Left Doors. Why? posted Sat Jan 26 2013 03:16:55 by JEKY

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format