Narrative:

We reported at XA30 and were scheduled to finish at XJ50 in ZZZ. Our first flight to ZZZ1 was uneventful except for low ceilings. On the return flight to ZZZ2 on taxi out; we experienced a flaps fail. We returned to the gate and maintenance was called and informed scheduling we would not be back to ZZZ2 until at least XK00. We blocked in to ZZZ2 at XK22. The ramp wanted us to do a quick turn in 25-30 mins and go to ZZZ. I; as well as my entire crew; felt we were unsafe due to fatigue to fly this leg. We were informed that our report time in the morning would be adjusted to give us 8 hours at reduced rest. I; as well as my crew; thought this was unsafe as well. Therefore; due to the circumstances and our current level of exhaustion; I and the rest of my crew called in fatigued. My flight attendant was given a hard time about this and was tried to be coerced/guilted into doing the flight by the scheduling supervisor; and was treated rudely. She did call in fatigued as well. Myself and my crew were put in a very bad position here. The loss of pay (almost 5 hours) was discussed. Inconvenience of passenger as well was considered. However; in the end we all chose safety. It should have been obvious to any manager that this was not a safe assignment and the flight to ZZZ should have been re-crewed well before we even got back to ZZZ2. Lack of crews is not an excuse for compromising safety! This airline must put safety first; in practice; not just in words. I cannot stress enough how unsafe this assignment would have been; not only for the ZZZ2-ZZZ leg; but also the next morning on the ZZZ-ZZZ2 leg with reduced rest of only 8 hours. We also would have had to reduce our report time in the morning for the ZZZ-ZZZ2 leg. Undoubtedly there would have been pressure to get that morning flight out as soon as possible. Again; this would have been a compromise in safety. This type of procedure must stop. Just because something is legal; does not make it safe. Supplemental information from acn 783179: I have seen this practice many times; and I knew that if I decided to continue the trip I would most likely get myself into a very unsafe situation.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CARJ FLT CREW REFUSES REASSIGNMENT DUE TO FATIGUE.

Narrative: WE RPTED AT XA30 AND WERE SCHEDULED TO FINISH AT XJ50 IN ZZZ. OUR FIRST FLT TO ZZZ1 WAS UNEVENTFUL EXCEPT FOR LOW CEILINGS. ON THE RETURN FLT TO ZZZ2 ON TAXI OUT; WE EXPERIENCED A FLAPS FAIL. WE RETURNED TO THE GATE AND MAINT WAS CALLED AND INFORMED SCHEDULING WE WOULD NOT BE BACK TO ZZZ2 UNTIL AT LEAST XK00. WE BLOCKED IN TO ZZZ2 AT XK22. THE RAMP WANTED US TO DO A QUICK TURN IN 25-30 MINS AND GO TO ZZZ. I; AS WELL AS MY ENTIRE CREW; FELT WE WERE UNSAFE DUE TO FATIGUE TO FLY THIS LEG. WE WERE INFORMED THAT OUR RPT TIME IN THE MORNING WOULD BE ADJUSTED TO GIVE US 8 HRS AT REDUCED REST. I; AS WELL AS MY CREW; THOUGHT THIS WAS UNSAFE AS WELL. THEREFORE; DUE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND OUR CURRENT LEVEL OF EXHAUSTION; I AND THE REST OF MY CREW CALLED IN FATIGUED. MY FLT ATTENDANT WAS GIVEN A HARD TIME ABOUT THIS AND WAS TRIED TO BE COERCED/GUILTED INTO DOING THE FLT BY THE SCHEDULING SUPVR; AND WAS TREATED RUDELY. SHE DID CALL IN FATIGUED AS WELL. MYSELF AND MY CREW WERE PUT IN A VERY BAD POS HERE. THE LOSS OF PAY (ALMOST 5 HRS) WAS DISCUSSED. INCONVENIENCE OF PAX AS WELL WAS CONSIDERED. HOWEVER; IN THE END WE ALL CHOSE SAFETY. IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN OBVIOUS TO ANY MGR THAT THIS WAS NOT A SAFE ASSIGNMENT AND THE FLT TO ZZZ SHOULD HAVE BEEN RE-CREWED WELL BEFORE WE EVEN GOT BACK TO ZZZ2. LACK OF CREWS IS NOT AN EXCUSE FOR COMPROMISING SAFETY! THIS AIRLINE MUST PUT SAFETY FIRST; IN PRACTICE; NOT JUST IN WORDS. I CANNOT STRESS ENOUGH HOW UNSAFE THIS ASSIGNMENT WOULD HAVE BEEN; NOT ONLY FOR THE ZZZ2-ZZZ LEG; BUT ALSO THE NEXT MORNING ON THE ZZZ-ZZZ2 LEG WITH REDUCED REST OF ONLY 8 HRS. WE ALSO WOULD HAVE HAD TO REDUCE OUR RPT TIME IN THE MORNING FOR THE ZZZ-ZZZ2 LEG. UNDOUBTEDLY THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN PRESSURE TO GET THAT MORNING FLT OUT ASAP. AGAIN; THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A COMPROMISE IN SAFETY. THIS TYPE OF PROC MUST STOP. JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS LEGAL; DOES NOT MAKE IT SAFE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 783179: I HAVE SEEN THIS PRACTICE MANY TIMES; AND I KNEW THAT IF I DECIDED TO CONTINUE THE TRIP I WOULD MOST LIKELY GET MYSELF INTO A VERY UNSAFE SITUATION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.