Operational tempo and economic considerations affecting fatigue among maintenance personnel

As result of increased financial pressure on airlines over the last 10-15 years, there have been changes in the way maintenance organizations conduct their work. The number of maintenance employees per aircraft has been reduced significantly, even taking into consideration that the present fleet demands less maintenance due to increased quality and more efficient maintenance programs. Only in specific maintenance tasks, such as primary flight control work, is this ratio still more-or-less normal. For almost all other tasks, there are now just spot checks of 10-15% of the work actually performed by someone else. Multiple accidents have identified this as a contributing factor, including an incident in 2015 wherein an Airbus A319 lost both engine cowlings and caught fire during takeoff.
Contract maintenance personnel have economic incentives to seek out overtime to maximize their income. A large number of countries still have not set maximum duration working times for maintenance staff like there are for pilots. Due to tight daytime flight schedules, there is increasing pressure for nightshift operations (there is a known safety risk when working under pressure in night hours on complicated work) on the involved maintenance organization.
Long shifts and midnight hours have become a cultural norm in maintenance. Many mechanics will work 56 straight days before a 28-day rest period, without any intermediate rest days. Without changes in working conditions for maintenance, attempts to correct that fatigue will only have short-term benefits. In 2013, the FAA tested a fatigue countermeasures training program on maintenance personnel; while the program raised awareness of the dangers of fatigue, actual fatigue management declined within six weeks of training.