Confidential Human Factors
Incident Reporting Programme
The Charity
Aviation
Maritime
CC7109
Initial Report
I’m reporting a systemic safety concern regarding commercial pressure during first-wave departures at {operator}. Cabin crew are expected to complete full safety and security checks, deliver a briefing, and prepare the cabin — all within a 15-minute window, before automatic boarding at -30.
Passengers are released to board whether or not the crew are ready. While it is technically possible to delay this by notifying the ground staff, in practice this is discouraged. The culture suggests any delay is a failure, and that SCCMs should simply “make it work.” This creates significant pressure to rush checks or cut corners.
Yes, crew can stop boarding if needed — but that’s not the point. The problem is a structure that assumes ideal conditions and shifts blame to individual crew when things don’t go to plan. Responsibility is pushed onto SCCMs without giving them time, authority, or genuine discretion.
This isn’t about isolated failings. It’s about a system that quietly erodes safety margins and encourages rushed departures under the guise of efficiency. {Operator} presents this as “possible,” but just because it can be done doesn’t mean it’s safe — or fair.
I fully expect the standard reply — that “the SCCM is responsible for ensuring checks are completed before boarding.” But I need to be clear:
Responsibility without adequate time or authority is meaningless. This statement ignores the power imbalance between frontline staff and a corporate machine demanding targets, with a structure designed to discourage reporting delays. It puts legal and procedural responsibility on SCCMs, without supporting them operationally.
If CHIRP or the CAA are serious about safety culture, this must be challenged at a procedural and policy level, not passed off as a “training issue” or personal failing. Otherwise, the system is only encouraging silence and speed — not safety.
Company Comment
Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback and would like to offer further context to reassure you that safety remains our top priority.
The times allocated for pre-flight duties, including briefings, security searches, and safety equipment checks, have been rigorously trialled before implementation to ensure they are sufficient. We maintain a robust safety culture where these operational practices are genuinely prioritised and integrated into every aspect of our operation.
While we strive to meet our customers’ expectations for timely departures, we do not compromise on safety. Our culture recognises that there may be occasions when crew need more time to complete pre-flight duties due to various reasons such as awaiting a standby crew member, additional security requirements, or cabin defects. In such cases, our SCCMs are empowered to delay boarding by liaising with the ground crew if necessary.
If a boarding delay occurs, it may prompt a transparent discussion with the base management team. However, this is intended to help us understand the reasons for the delay so we can identify areas for improvement. It is not a punitive measure, and our commitment to a ‘just’ culture remains at the heart of what we do.
Feedback from our crew is invaluable, as it not only helps us enhance our safety practices but also supports our crew by ensuring they can perform their duties without undue pressure. This leads to better outcomes for everyone involved.
Our SCCMs play a crucial role in managing cabin safety and are encouraged to report any operational issues through channels such as duty report or feedback forms, and any safety issues must be reported via a safety report. We actively encourage using these channels as they are vital for making informed operational decisions.
We take the concerns raised in your report seriously and will continue to review at both a procedural and policy level, any opportunities to review and revise our practices, ensuring that safety is not just prioritised but that our crew are operationally supported to maintain our high safety standards.
CAA Comment
Cabin crew should not feel pressured to start passenger boarding or close the aircraft doors until they are satisfied all required safety activities have been achieved. There should be no deviation from published standard operating procedures (SOPs) in order to facilitate an on-time departure. If cabin crew feel they are being pressured to achieve an unrealistic passenger boarding time it is essential that this is reported using the company reporting scheme. Such reporting should be managed in accordance with the principles of just culture.
CHIRP Comment
While there is a clear operational need to keep flights on schedule, this must never come at the cost of safety.
This report highlights an ongoing concern as CHIRP continues to hear from crew who feel pressured to meet operational targets. Whether these pressures are real or perceived, cabin crew must not be put in the position where safety-critical procedures feel optional. If systemic pressures are contributing this mindset, they must be addressed.
When schedules are tight, it can feel like an environment where rushing becomes the norm. But it is essential that crew members do not feel compelled to cut corners in order to “make it work.” Safety checks, briefings and preparation are not optional and should never be rushed. These aren’t extras; they’re essential to doing the job properly. If the timelines given don’t allow crew to complete their duties safely and confidently, this must be raised internally with your operator.
Also keep reporting to CHIRP. One report may be perceived by airlines as an isolated viewpoint, but multiple reports 10, 20, 50 flags it as a concern, showing it affects more than just one sector or one crew member. Sometimes it takes both CHIRP and operators seeing multiple reports to drive meaningful change. Every report helps build a clearer picture of the operational reality.
Subtle pressures, shaped by workplace culture, expectations and unspoken norms can have an impact on crew behaviour. Feeling under scrutiny or fearing criticism for delays can make it harder to follow procedures with the time and attention they require, even when those delays result from doing the job correctly and safely. If you experience this kind of pressure or feel your actions are being unfairly judged, it’s important to report it.
When issues go unreported, organisations may remain unaware of the day-to-day challenges affecting frontline staff. Reporting helps build a complete and honest picture of operational realities, enabling safety teams to spot trends and advocate for meaningful change.
A report similar to this was received and published in CHIRP CC FEEDBACK Edition 85.