A TEENAGE BOY WAS ALLOWED TO SIT IN THE COCKPIT JUMPSEAT.

Narrative

WE WERE SCHEDULED TO FLY FROM CVG TO PHL. THE FLT ATTENDANT BROUGHT HER 14 YR OLD SON WITH HER AS A NON REVENUE PAX FROM PHL TO CVG BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T HAVE ANYONE TO WATCH HIM. WHEN WE GOT TO CVG; IT TURNED OUT THAT THE FLT FROM CVG TO PHL WOULD BE FULL. WITHOUT MY KNOWLEDGE; THE CAPT TOLD THE GATE AGENT THAT HER SON COULD RIDE IN THE JUMPSEAT. THE BOY CAME ABOARD AND PAX WERE ALSO BOARDING ALLOWING ME LITTLE TIME TO ASSESS THE SIT. I DID NOT SPEAK UP THAT I THOUGHT THIS WAS A BAD IDEA BECAUSE I HAD LITTLE TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT AND I DID NOT WANT TO CREATE A CONFLICT BTWN MYSELF AND THE CAPT AND FLT ATTENDANT. (WHILE THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN LEGAL UNDER 135; UNDER 121 IT WAS NOT.) WHILE THIS WAS NOT DIRECTLY A SAFETY HAZARD; IT DEFINITELY PRESENTED A COMS BREAKDOWN AND THUS A BREAKDOWN IN CRM. IT POSES SOME DIFFICULT QUESTIONS TO ANSWER CONCERNING CRM. THE CAPT'S JUDGEMENT WAS POOR; BUT MINE WAS PARTICULARLY POOR BECAUSE I DID NOT COMMUNICATE MY CONCERN; WHICH IS THE ONLY PURPOSE I SERVE AS THE SECOND PLT. IT WAS MY HUMAN NATURE WHICH LED TO MY ALLOWING THIS TO TAKE PLACE. UNFORTUNATELY; HUMAN NATURE CONTINUES TO BE A WEAK LINK IN CRM AND PROBABLY WILL BE UNTIL COCKPITS ARE COMPLETELY AUTOMATED.