Dessie Ellis (Dublin North West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I thank the IAA for its presentation. One of the main issues with these proposed rules will allow for pilots to be on stand-by call for 22 hours a day. A pilot could be asked to fly even in difficult conditions. This can be extended by an hour in unforeseen events. We are aware that unforeseen events can happen often in the aviation industry. The employer can state the pilot’s discretion is not acceptable. I am told that in some cases pilots have been fired for refusing to work hours in which they felt they could not operate safely. Should airport stand-by and short call stand-by have the same cap of 16 hours?

The European Aviation Safety Agency, EASA, commissioned reports have recommended a limit of ten hours to avoid critical levels of fatigue, yet the EASA has recommended 11 hours and more. What is the authority’s opinion on this?

Multiple take-offs are the most stressful and tiring part of a pilot’s job. Research shows that fatigue builds up faster with every separate take-off a pilot performs in a shift. Research has also shown that duty should be reduced by a minimum of 30 minutes after a pilot performs a second take-off. EASA wants this to be after the third take-off and only by 30 minutes. Does the IAA believe the proposal to limit this to twice weekly one hour extensions, to reduce the daily maximum flight time as of the second take-off and to reduce by 45 minutes as of the fourth take-off is a solution?

At present pilots can have their home base changed at their employer’s whim. EASA wants to introduce the principle of permanence. This is a good move but needs to be provided for in legislation. The current proposal is that permanence should be observed. Pilots are concerned with the soft language used in the rule and believe it needs to be strengthened.

Does the IAA agree that there should be an upper limit on the number of hours per day a pilot should work? Does the IAA agree that take-offs and landings significantly increase fatigue?