The Airline Pilots’ Association of India on Friday warned the Directorate General of Civil Aviation, that its decision to hold back the implementation of the revised Flight Duty Time Limit norms because IndiGo failed to comply has opened the door to an unsafe flying environment passengers. In a letter to the aviation regulator, the association said the move runs against the spirit of the new fatigue rules and directly compromises public safety, especially after months of written representations and face-to-face discussions.
What did ALPA say?
ALPA reminded the regulator that safety cannot be weighed against commercial pressures, noting that any fatigue-linked incident arising from these concessions would rest with the DGCA, not the pilots. The association said that during its meeting with the regulator on November 24, the understanding had been firm that no airline, including those with strong commercial influence, would receive exemptions or operational variations. That conversation, ALPA said, reaffirmed that FDTL norms exist entirely to protect human life and that diluting them exposes crews, passengers and aircraft to unnecessary risk.
The association also said that airlines had been given nearly two years to prepare for the new rules, divided into two phases. Yet, barely a month after Phase II took effect, IndiGo reported disruptions that coincided with an expanded winter schedule approved by the DGCA. ALPA said that instead of adjusting schedules to fit the rules, the country’s largest carrier has been granted selective rest dispensations that run counter to both the letter and intent of the regulations.
ALPA urges DGCA to investigate the ‘scarcity’ narrative
In its letter, ALPA called on the DGCA to immediately withdraw all such waivers and to investigate whether an artificial narrative of pilot scarcity is being created to justify weakening the rules. It also urged punitive action against IndiGo’s responsible management and full enforcement of the FDTL framework without carve-outs.
The group highlighted what it described as dangerous regulatory modifications, including a softened definition of night operations and an increase in permitted night landings from two to four. These changes, it said, strip away essential fatigue protections and have a measurable effect on pilot alertness and long-term health.
