Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch; Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Ground Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Visual Observer (UAS)
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were operating our flight ZZZ to ZZZ1. This flight operates at close to if not at its max weight where maximum performance from the aircraft and crew are required due to the short runways. Headwind operations; or more importantly; absence of any tailwinds; should be the main concern of ATC and pilots when utilizing this airport when such performance is required.In the hours prior to this flight ZZZ was running a south operation; departing RWY XX; as one would expect with a reasonable headwind (180/7kts). Approximately 20 minutes before departure; they switched to a north operation; now departing RWY XY. This change seemed illogical as it now was using a runway that had a 7 knot tailwind for takeoff. With this change our flight was unable to depart as we were too heavy due to a tailwind weight penalty of 9;030 lbs from our runway limit.I asked ZZZ Ground/Tower Control why they had changed to a north operation. The answer we received was that arriving aircraft on the XXXXX Visual were encountering a tailwind at altitude and therefore the change. This puzzled me. Is this an official procedure that the FAA ATC has at ZZZ or shouldn't runway selection for takeoff and landing be based on surface winds?We had no choice but to wait for an opening for RWY XX; which caused a significant delay to our companies reliability operation; not to mention putting other aircraft in an awkward position of either compromising safety margins or accepting lengthy delays. Switching runways around based on winds at altitude rather than safety of landing and departing on short runways with tailwinds; puts the pilots in the position as the last line of defense for safety.  Just FYI; we also only had one reverser. Although RTO does not include the reversers in its stopping distance calculations; it was still a consideration to us.ATC changing runways from a headwind to a strong tailwind. Putting pilots in a less optimal position to operate their aircraft.The additional work load and max performance requirements when utilizing a short runway with a tailwind should be avoided as much as possible especially at ZZZ. Every foot of runway concrete is paramount to operating safely at this airport. Therefore every knot of tailwind compromises that safety margin.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported ATC changed the departure runway creating a unacceptable tailwind takeoff condition. ATC explained the switch was to accommodate the aircraft on the STAR encountering a tailwind.