In a developing standoff between Indian aviation regulators and major carriers, the Federation of Indian Airlines (FIA), which represents IndiGo, Air India, and SpiceJet, has pushed back strongly against the Directorate General of Civil Aviation’s (DGCA) proposed fatigue management norms for cabin crew. In a letter to the regulator, the airlines argued that the draft Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) regarding Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) are “more restrictive” than global standards and threaten to severely impact operational flexibility.
The core of the airlines’ objection lies in how fatigue is measured and managed. The DGCA’s draft, released in October 2025, proposes stricter caps on flight times and duty periods to ensure crew well-being. However, the carriers contend that the regulator should focus on “Flight Duty Period” (the total time a crew member is on duty) rather than “Flight Time” (the time spent actually flying) as the primary metric. They argue that rigid cumulative caps or direct linkages to the number of landings (common in short-haul operations like IndiGo’s) fail to account for the nuances of diverse operational models.
Perhaps the most contentious point of friction is the issue of accommodation. The proposed norms advocate for better rest conditions, which implies single-occupancy rooms to ensure uninterrupted sleep. The FIA has countered this by insisting on the continued allowance of twin-sharing arrangements, provided they are under “operator-defined guidelines.” Their argument frames “rest quality” as a function of environment (think quiet, dark rooms) rather than privacy, asserting that effective recovery depends on circadian alignment rather than whether a crew member has the room to themselves.
However, buried within the technical jargon of “cumulative caps” and “circadian alignment” is a thinly veiled warning: strict enforcement could break flight schedules. The FIA’s letter explicitly states that the proposed framework offers “limited operational flexibility.” In the high-stakes language of aviation lobbying, this is often interpreted as a signal that the airlines cannot maintain their current aggressive schedules if the rules are enforced.
The implication is clear; if the DGCA insists on these “restrictive” norms, the passengers may face a repeat of the chaos seen in December 2025, when IndiGo cancelled over 5,000 flights. That meltdown was attributed to a pilot shortage and an inability to adhere to new pilot FDTL norms, a scenario the airlines seem keen to remind the regulator of as they negotiate terms for cabin crew.
Amusingly, this dire warning of potential disruption comes almost exactly alongside a contradictory proclamation of preparedness. Just a day prior, on February 11, 2026, IndiGo informed the DGCA that it was “fully prepared” to implement the revised FDTL norms for pilots. Following the expiration of a one-time exemption granted during the December crisis, the airline assured the regulator that “all necessary operational, rostering, and monitoring arrangements” were in place.
The juxtaposition is striking. On one hand, the country’s largest carrier is publicly projecting an image of total compliance and operational robustness regarding pilot fatigue rules. On the other, it is simultaneously leading a lobbying effort that claims similar strictures for cabin crew will strangle operations and render their schedules unflyable. This “Jekyll and Hyde” approach highlights the tightrope Indian aviation is walking: balancing the public demand for on-time performance and the regulator’s mandate for safety, all while trying to keep costs low enough to remain profitable.
As the DGCA reviews the feedback, the question remains whether the regulator will bow to the “operational flexibility” argument or hold firm on fatigue standards. If the December meltdown was a dress rehearsal, the industry is signalling that the main event (caused by cabin crew shortages this time) could be just around the corner if their demands aren’t met.
