CloudSailor

This is why the NPRM is, in my humble opinion, a gamble for us. If I lived in MEM, or in any domicile for that matter, this would be an easy decision in favor of the regulation. But, like about 65-70% (is that about right?) of FedEx pilots, I commute.

Now, do I decide to commute? Yes. Was I offered this job on the condition that I have to live in domicile? No. Commuting is a quality of life benefit we get as airline pilots. If they decide to include commuting in the regulation, it might affect us in ways we don't even understand right now. I know that the families of the victims of the Colgan accident have been in Washington, wearing red shirts, and lobbying big-time for the issues that they think are important. Commuting is one of those issues. And, as our MEC President said, the Colgan families are being listened to. They are a very effective group.

As I stated previously, I'm all for safety being the number one issue. And that is exactly why, as a commuter, I see this regulation as possibly decreasing safety, instead of increasing it, for commuters (the reason this issue finally came to a head to begin with). For example, I would be much more prone to fatigue if I had to go from 3 night hub turns, to commute home, to go back to day-time schedule for two or three days, then commute back to operate at night. I know from a previous carrier that multiple commutes per week can be brutal (for example, 8-10 commutes per month vs. 2-4). This could also create a situation that 3-4 days off won't be enough time to go home (if there are hard requirements for show-time in domicile).

With no disrespect intended, it is too bad that because of the un-professionalism of a few, all commuters might have to pay the price. Also too bad that we are even discussing commuting included in a regulation that should deal solely with antiquated flight/duty limitations.

I understand the issue from both perspectives.

Anyway, this is most likely already decided in favor of the highest bidder (which is not us)...