I think we all have a vested interest in not screwing eachother over

 

So as always lots not being said and knowing the other side of the story, it’s awesome how we’re willing to stab our brothers and sisters in the back.

Crew are both commuters. Both made two walks to check for jumpers well before boarding and door closure. No attempts were made to flag the Captain or the FO down, or identify themselves as wanting to jump. Gate agents didn’t say piddly until the plane was 3 minutes prior to departure.

Initial request was for the FD, and was denied (FOM Guidance). Two minutes later (D0), another request was made and now for the XFA. Again, FOM was checked, and per the FOM must have “authorization from the individuals director”.

SOC then was called by the Captain, not the other way around, and the dillema was explained. This authorization was not on file, the jumper never provided proof of it, and since it was an XFA request, Captain asked to have it emailed to him as well as having the CP s CC d on it. They were not able to provide such authorization. This mechanic was not on the release, nor was it ever amended to have this person on there.

SOC said not to take a delay and seal up and go. So that’s what happened.

Are you going to vilify a person for following company policy to the letter? Or how about the fact that when both crew made the walk twice and no one said anything? Or the fact the gate agents waited until the 11th hour?

 

There are at least a few of our captains (non-commuters I am guessing) out there who are not even aware of the option to JS by adding yourself to the flight release. Once in LAS I had to patiently explain that you could do this, and the guy looked at me like I was crazy. I got on only because there were seats in the back.

 

There are commuters and non commuters. Its easy for non commuters to not understand what we go through. When crap like this happens we need to educate, not attack.

 

I think we all need to chill. There are 3 sides to every story and so far we are only hearing one side second hand. Let’s not jump to any conclusions until said CA and FO say what happened


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The issue was the lack of the proper authorization letter for personal jumpseat travel (reference Flight Operations Manual 6-12 dash One Tree). Up until now it was pretty much understood that if you are listed on the release you can ride..that will likely change now.

 

There are two sides to the story...heard that the CA tried to make it work. Just saying don’t judge the person until we know the facts.

 

The mechanic had a letter in hand from the director of MX, but was never given the opportunity to show it to the CA. But look what's done is done. I just hope that more care will be taken in the future by all of us.

Agreed with all, I don't have the full picture, just what I heard. I wasn't there obviously. I just wish we had a way to see who is operating like our old system just so we can reach out to each other privately.

 

Back to our regularly scheduled programming.... in other news...AA Travel Planner is finally here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Do you mean to suggest that listing a JS rider's name on the release serves as a substitute for them holding a boarding pass depicting a jump seat assignment?

This is an honest question; I've seen this practiced before, however the FOM seems quite clear on the boarding pass requirement (for the scenarios under discussion). Am I missing something?