Originally Posted by
UPSierra
If you commute to work, exceed limits, then are responsible for a major accident, god save you. The government right wingers will make you a poster child for why commuting needs to be regulated and why unions really don't care about safety. There is no doubt that ALPA convinced the Obama Administration to be hands off on the real fatigue issue in the Colgan accident, that is irresponsible commuting practices.
Let's face it, this FDT rule was all about hoping that Babbitt could deliver a free-bie at the negotiating table. Watching the IPA sue the FAA is like watching an OWS protest. Cool, but are you real serious about addressing the problem, or are you simply trying to create media hype?
What limits? The regulators, rightfully so, realized you cant legislate what it means to be fit for duty. Just because you can "see" where a commuting pilot was physically located prior to duty does not make them "unfit" for duty. All accidents take a 72 hour look back (minimum) at the pilots personal life and rest, your single lens view on the dreaded "commuter" is ridiculous, ANY pilot who would show a questionable rest and action history prior to showing for a duty period would be negatively viewed.
Your callous remarks fly in the face of the hard work done by pilots at your own Company to fight fatigue, the new rules are not a "freebie", are you saying the science based rules are just a way to get free work rules and have no improved levels of safety built in?
The enemy is not the commuter, it is all pilots, who act in questionable ways and show up "unfit" for duty. It is a litmus test that may someday be quantifiable by some fancy and objective device or machine, but until then we need these new rules and to not blame a travel habit as the only indicator of fitness for duty.