An international flight attendant discusses the stresses of long flts; rest cycle scheduling prefere...

Attributes
ACN	804272
Time
Date	200806
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B777-200
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise : level
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight attendant : on duty
Experience	flight attendant time airline total : 39 flight attendant time total : 39 flight attendant time type : 20
ASRS Report	804272
Events
Anomaly	cabin event other non adherence : company policies
Independent Detector	other other : 1fa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Cabin Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Cabin Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

How the problem arose: purser on the flight violated crew rest break policy (an air carrier policy of having 3 rest breaks spread among the crew) which caused a thin coverage on the plane. Instead of dividing the time by 3 (thus having more people in the cabin); she divided it into 2 breaks. Example: 2 breaks = 3 hours. 3 breaks = 2 hours rest. This means instead of 4;4;3 on break -- it means 5; 6. This leaves a lot more coverage for fewer flight attendants to maintain the cabin. Contributing factor: fatigue -- this is a hotly debated issue and causes many hard feelings: too many flight attendants (and pilots) are commuting from coast-to-coast or continent-to-continent and without much rest are coming to work too tired to work; and the flight attendants depend on sleeping on the plane (international flts) causing coverage problems. I have seen this continuously. Crews flying entirely too fatigued due to huge commutes without rest before trips. Domestic -- with no breaks. International -- with as much sleep as they can force the purser to give them between services.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN INTL FLT ATTENDANT DISCUSSES THE STRESSES OF LONG FLTS; REST CYCLE SCHEDULING PREFERENCES (2 VS 3); AND CREWS COMMUTING TO WORK ARRIVING ALREADY FATIGUED AND TIRED.

Narrative: HOW THE PROB AROSE: PURSER ON THE FLT VIOLATED CREW REST BREAK POLICY (AN ACR POLICY OF HAVING 3 REST BREAKS SPREAD AMONG THE CREW) WHICH CAUSED A THIN COVERAGE ON THE PLANE. INSTEAD OF DIVIDING THE TIME BY 3 (THUS HAVING MORE PEOPLE IN THE CABIN); SHE DIVIDED IT INTO 2 BREAKS. EXAMPLE: 2 BREAKS = 3 HRS. 3 BREAKS = 2 HRS REST. THIS MEANS INSTEAD OF 4;4;3 ON BREAK -- IT MEANS 5; 6. THIS LEAVES A LOT MORE COVERAGE FOR FEWER FLT ATTENDANTS TO MAINTAIN THE CABIN. CONTRIBUTING FACTOR: FATIGUE -- THIS IS A HOTLY DEBATED ISSUE AND CAUSES MANY HARD FEELINGS: TOO MANY FLT ATTENDANTS (AND PLTS) ARE COMMUTING FROM COAST-TO-COAST OR CONTINENT-TO-CONTINENT AND WITHOUT MUCH REST ARE COMING TO WORK TOO TIRED TO WORK; AND THE FLT ATTENDANTS DEPEND ON SLEEPING ON THE PLANE (INTL FLTS) CAUSING COVERAGE PROBS. I HAVE SEEN THIS CONTINUOUSLY. CREWS FLYING ENTIRELY TOO FATIGUED DUE TO HUGE COMMUTES WITHOUT REST BEFORE TRIPS. DOMESTIC -- WITH NO BREAKS. INTL -- WITH AS MUCH SLEEP AS THEY CAN FORCE THE PURSER TO GIVE THEM BTWN SVCS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

An international flight attendant discusses the stresses of long flts; rest cycle scheduling preferences (2 vs 3); and crews commuting to work arriving already fatigued and tired.