Transport Committee on April 6th, 2017

[Capt Matthew Hogan]

First of all, that's an excellent question.

I commend Justice Moshansky because he really changed the face of Canadian aviation and improved aviation safety. I truly value his opinion. It carries a lot of weight. He brought a very different approach to aviation safety in the sense that he said that this is an entire system, not a one-off event, and we have to look at the latent risks involved in the system. We need to do this in a very constructive, thoughtful way, and we need expert opinions to look at the overall system structure and how this fits together.

We know at this time a significant issue that's outstanding, and has been outstanding for some time, is the aviation fatigue issue. That's why the Air Canada Pilots Association believes it's important that we have one level of safety in Canada for all Canadians, and that we don't compete on safety in this country's aviation sector.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Dias, you have the floor.

[Jerry Dias]

There's no question that we would support an inquiry because there are a lot of moving parts, as the previous speakers have said.

Fatigue is the common word you're going to hear here today because that's the key part if you're talking about safety. Unifor doesn't differentiate between cargo and passenger. Fatigue is fatigue. You can't argue with the science initiatives that have come as a result of analyzing the sector. Flying at night is more difficult than flying during the day because of the body. One can argue that you can train your body to react, but I tend to disagree.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Dias, I am interested in the topic of fatigue, and we will surely deal with it later. I really wanted your opinion on the commission of inquiry. That's what you gave me. Thank you.

I want to be certain to have the time to hear Mr. Bray-Stone's answer to this question, as well.

[Jordan Bray-Stone]

We certainly would support an inquiry. I particularly agreed with one of the honourable judge's comments: that a formal inquiry is one of the only settings where you will really hear the truth. When we're talking about front-line employees, we know what's going on. We literally live it every day. Front-line employees often do not feel that they are safe to speak up because they fear reprisal. A formal inquiry provides that opportunity to speak up without fear and in total honesty.

We agree with some of his comments that there have been such significant changes in our industry, and that it has been so long since there was a detailed analysis of what's going on in the industry, that it's high time that happened.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Hogan, I understand that part of the inquiry is about fatigue. While considering the industry, what is your general opinion about a commission of inquiry on aviation safety?

[Capt Matthew Hogan]

Aviation is terribly unforgiving, and Justice Moshansky outlined the fact that there hasn't been an inquiry for a very long period of time. I believe it's been 28 years. Maybe it's high time that we take a look at all of the aviation system and get a proper assessment. There's obviously concern when we have a sit-down today at this level because if there wasn't the regulator, we wouldn't be having these discussions at this time.

Yes, we believe that it's high time that we improve aviation safety on all fronts. Of course, there's also the fatigue aspect that we're keenly interested in.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Now that we know your interest in a commission of inquiry that would allow us to go further, it would be nice if each of your groups would expand this type of request. For example, what could a commission of inquiry bring, and what are the risks? I think that would be important. As my hon. colleague mentioned, statistics show that incidents are declining, despite the problems of fatigue and flight attendants. Airport personnel is a new issue that needs to be addressed.

We feel that the concern for safety is stronger in all industries and unions. At the same time, we would like to go even further. So it would be nice if you could expand that request further.

There's one more thing I absolutely wanted to say. Some people distinguish between freight and passenger transport. I am the MP for the Lac-Mégantic region, where a train without passengers killed 47 people. You will understand that this, in my opinion, is an issue where nothing should be taken lightly. In my view, when there are safety deficiencies, the potential risk is the same whether you are carrying goods or passengers. I think it is absolutely necessary that we look at this. There shouldn't be two levels of safety, not in rail transport or in air transport.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Mr. Berthold. I'm sorry that no one has the time to answer. I allowed you to go over time to get your question.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You maybe can try to get an answer at another time.

Mr. Sikand.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My question is for Captain Hogan.

Previously we had witnesses by telecommunication suggesting there is a window between 4 a.m. and 6 a.m. when we shouldn't have captains fly. As Mr. Dias suggested, the body is the body. I can certainly appreciate that certain types of flights would be more taxing than others, but ultimately we are all the same. This is the science.

My question is simple. Shouldn't our fatigue risk management be based on science? I believe you mentioned that our operations have a bit of a discrepancy with science.

[Capt Matthew Hogan]

Certainly. That's a great point there. First of all, fatigue does not discriminate. We all have the same physiology. The science shows that, whether you're a ground handler, a mechanic, or a flight attendant on board the aircraft, you are impacted in terms of performance by fatigue at the window of circadian low between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m.

It is critical, in terms of an overall fatigue risk management system, in order to reduce risk.... Now, I'm not saying that, just because you don't have an accident or an incident, it does not mean you're safe. It has to do with being exposed to risk and being proactive in reducing those risks. You can't look at safety in a hindsight manner. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. We need prescriptive, science-based rules in the aviation sector moving forward that apply to all aspects, whether it be 703, 704, or 705 cargo operators, because all pilots, all people who work in those sectors, are affected by the same physiology.

If we are truly interested in reducing those risks for the entire Canadian public, we need these rules to apply in all areas of aviation safety.

If we're talking about fatigue risk management systems, we believe that it should be a science-based system, but the critical issue when it comes to fatigue risk management systems is that you have science-based, prescriptive regulations in place upon which you overlay actual data from an ActiGraph or FitBit that monitors, so it's objective. You know. It does not lie. Then from that point forward, on a case-by-case basis, you can adjust the fatigue risk management system going forward, but to simply come in and provide a fatigue risk management system without appropriate prescriptive science-based regulations in place first is basically a licence to further exploit the system, and you're looking at safety, at the cost. You're looking at not putting safety first.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Okay. This is just a real-world example. I believe you indicated that you fly for a particular carrier. Does the company you work for fly down to Peru?

[Capt Matthew Hogan]

Yes.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

I took one of those flights, and it took off well past midnight, flew down, and it was a pretty long flight. Could you give us some insight into what those pilots perhaps would face?

[Capt Matthew Hogan]

Certainly. First off, in the Canadian aviation industry, people might not be aware, but pilots operate under very different working conditions. The Canadian Aviation Regulations lay out a minimum standard to be operated to, and let me tell you, the industry, of course, competes on safety and operates in many cases outside.... Very few operators operate to the bare minimum levels of safety laid out by Transport Canada. For example, Air Canada Rouge is a separate arm, wholly owned subsidiary of Air Canada. As such, in order to be competitive, they do not operate to the same standards that the Air Canada main line operates to. In essence, they are competing on safety. They're going to the minimum standard, not the highest and best standard. We at the Air Canada Pilots Association believe that there should be one standard for all Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Iacono.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My question is for the three witnesses.

I have met with officials from associations that represent pilots. Now, fatigue management is an issue that concerns them. Could you tell me how you think fatigue or the degree of fatigue varies depending on whether it is a long-haul flight or a series of shorter flights that require more take-offs and landings?

[Capt Matthew Hogan]

Definitely. There are some different issues at play there.

When you're looking at fatigue, you're looking at sleep debt, time on task, and circadian rhythm. In the case of a long-haul flight, you're looking at a lot of time on task and changes in time zones based on circadian rhythm, and then potentially sleep debt, if your sleep pattern is thrown off according to those changes in time zones and there's not appropriate rest period provided. That being said, for the smaller carriers, I've been there. I've done that. I've flown up in the Arctic. I've flown small planes. It's very taxing when you're doing many different sectors and you're taking off and landing, which are the two most dangerous periods of flight. The majority of accidents and incidents occur during takeoff and landing. As a result of the Colgan Air Flight 3407 investigation by the NTSB in the United States, they actually cited the fact that for landings between midnight and 5 a.m., there is eight times the chance of an accident or an incident, and for takeoffs between midnight and 5 a.m., there is 10 times the chance of an accident or an incident.

It is extremely taxing to have more takeoffs and landings, and it's exposing the individual pilot and the people on board to more risk.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Bray-Stone.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Be very brief.

[Jordan Bray-Stone]

As a flight attendant who relies on our pilots to be safe, I support Mr. Hogan's comments. For us for long hauls, it's time zones and sleep patterns, and for short hauls, it's the repetitive tasks and the rushing. By the end of multiple segments, you realize you're frazzled, and that's when steps get missed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bray-Stone.

Mr. Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here.

I'd particularly like to thank you for what you said in response to the question asked by my colleague, Mr. Berthold. You are demonstrating fairly clearly, as the former judge did before you, that the current study gives us an overview of the problem, which in reality is larger and would deserve to more than the six hours we can spend on it at the moment.

I will try to get back to the issue of fatigue, but since we are talking about it a lot, I want to make sure that I also cover other issues, including the flight attendant ratio. I always have a smile on my face when I'm lucky enough to occupy the two seats near the central cabin window—which gives me more leg room—and a flight attendant will explain to me in two minutes what emergency measures to take if there is a problem.

In cases like that, since we feel safe, we tell ourselves we won't have to apply these measures. However, I'd like to understand the real risk associated with the ratio rising from 1/40 to 1/50.

Mr. Bray-Stone, perhaps you could answer.