Answer

Introduction

Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) set statutory maximum duty/rest hours for flight crew to prevent fatigue while the DGCA (India’s civil aviation regulator) enforces these safety norms. Suspending FDTL for passenger relief risks normalising operational shortcuts that undermine aviation safety culture and systemic resilience.

Body

Long-term consequences of prioritising relief over safety

• Fatigue normalization: Allowing duty extensions can normalise crew fatigue, increasing human-error risks in routine and emergency operations.
  Eg: Pilots’ unions warned that FDTL relaxations compromise fatigue mitigation, risking operational safety. 
• Safety-culture erosion: Regulatory rollbacks under operational pressure weaken deterrence and send poor compliance signals to airlines.
• Regulatory capture risk: Frequent exemptions risk perceptions that industry convenience overrides public-safety mandates, inviting regulatory capture.
• Operational fragility: Short-term fixes mask systemic problems (rostering, crew planning), leaving the sector vulnerable to future shocks.
  Eg: DGCA inquiry cited inadequate crew planning by IndiGo as a core cause of cancellations. 
• Public trust decline: Passengers may lose confidence in aviation oversight if relief trumps safety, affecting demand and reputation.
• Legal-liability exposure: Relaxations could complicate liability if fatigue-related incidents occur while exemptions are in force.
  Eg: Aviation lawyers and experts warned of legal complications and raised safety accountability questions. 
• International credibility hit: Perceived loosened oversight may affect bilateral safety assessments and airlines’ global standing.

How DGCA can prevent compromising aviation safety 

• Transparent justification: Any temporary relief must be publicly justified, time-bound and accompanied by clear safety safeguards.
• Strict conditionality: Attach strict conditions—enhanced monitoring, incident reporting, and immediate reversal if risks appear.
  Eg: DGCA deputed Flight Operations Inspectors and mandated remedial checks while easing specific clauses. 
• Root-cause remediation:  Require airlines to submit verified crew-rostering and capacity plans before any future relaxations are considered.
  Eg: DGCA issued show-cause notices demanding IndiGo explain crew planning deficiencies. 
• Independent audit: Mandate external safety audits and fatigue-risk assessments to validate operational robustness post-exemption.
• Stakeholder consultation: Consult pilot associations, airports and safety experts prior to rule changes to incorporate frontline safety inputs.
• Contingency planning: Mandate binding contingency and surge-roster plans for airlines to handle peak disruptions without regulatory dilution.
• Clear accountability: Define penalties and enforceable corrective actions for non-compliance to deter future operational laxity.

Conclusion

Prioritising passenger relief by suspending fatigue rules may ease immediate disruption but risks systemic safety erosion, legal exposure and public mistrust. The DGCA must tether any short-term relief to transparent, conditional measures—root-cause fixes, independent audits, frontline consultation and strict accountability to preserve aviation safety and regulatory credibility.

DOWNLOAD PDF