Page 14 - 2016-Issue3

14 FATIGUE MANAGEMENT

hazards, and continuously monitor the stakeholder group; for example the chief pilot
may also be the primary scheduler. Larger
operation to ensure the mitigations in place are be confident that the operator has considered “ [...] it is strongly recom-
working correctly. In this environment, the airlines will have specialized departments that
operator will also need to establish transitional interact with the FSAG. The regulator needs to mended that the FSAG
procedures and ensure flight crews are includes representatives
properly trained. its operational and organizational profile in
The final “tier” in Figure 1 is FRMS. As deciding the composition of the FSAG which of all stakeholder
defined previously, FRMS is a data-driven principle functions are to: groups.
means of continuously monitoring and • oversee the development of the FRMS; just those that happen if a FRMS is employed. ”
managing fatigue-related safety risks based on • assist in FRMS implementation;
scientific principles, knowledge and Notice that these are hazards in general, not
operational experience that aim to ensure • oversee the ongoing operation of the FM
relevant personnel are performing at adequate processes; In fact, it is suggested that this method of
levels of alertness. While FRMS is the most • contribute as appropriate to the FRMS hazard identification is custom fit for a FSAG,
customizable and flexible approach, it is also safety assurance processes; to be accomplishing well before a FRMS is
the most resource intensive requiring a robust • maintain the FRMS documentation; and, considered, and specifically in the more
set of processes for risk management, safety comprehensive FM approach. The hazards and
assurance and safety promotion, all properly • be responsible for ongoing FRMS training risks of fatigue have been on the pilots’ radar
documented with appropriate policy. In short, and promotion. for many years. The movement from a
while FRMS is optional and not necessarily for It is the third point above where a FSAG can be prescriptive approach to a data-driven,
everyone, there are several elements of FRMS effective in the FM process. Once again risk-based, approach looks more promising. It
that apply perfectly well to fatigue referencing to Figure 1, hazard identification is will only be effective, however, if all stakehold-
management. One of those elements is the a key part of FM. An effective FSAG, ers recognize its strengths, weaknesses and the
Fatigue Safety Action Group (FSAG). comprised and executed as defined in the need for all stakeholder groups to be equal
Although not required under the ICAO SARPs Fatigue Management Guide for Airline partners. This starts with a culture that not
for FRMS, FSAG is highly recommended in Operators, can be a powerful tool in not only only recognizes the need for a just reporting
the co-branded Fatigue Management Guide for identifying hazards but also developing culture, but strongly encourages it. This is not
Airline Operators and should be established mitigations to strengthen the operation by about finding creative ways to do more with
and used even before a FRMS is contemplated. specifically mitigating and minimizing pilot less, but rather how to be smarter and more
Since fatigue management must be based fatigue. For example, the ICAO SARPs (Annex effective in dealing with daily operations by
on shared responsibility and requires an 6 Part 1, Appendix 7) require three types of finding, identifying, and mitigating fatigue
effective safety reporting culture, it is strongly hazard identification: hazards. It is truly a team sport!
recommended that the FSAG includes
representatives of all stakeholder groups
(management, scheduling staff, and crew
member representatives) with input from other
individuals as needed to ensure that it has
appropriate access to scientific, statistical, and
medical expertise. Inclusion of all stakeholders
is an important strategy for promoting
engagement in the FRMS. The size and
composition of the FSAG will vary for different
operators, but should be appropriate to the size
and complexity of the operations covered by
the FRMS, and to the level of fatigue risk in
those operations. For small operators, a single
individual may represent more than one

Issue 3 | 2016 InterPilot | The safety and Technical Journal of IFALPA