Originally Posted by
FmrFreightDog
Don't worry. They said they'll work it out over the next year or so. Stand by for another significant setback to the status quo....
A year ago my Rep (44) spent a good half an hour convincing me the FAR 117 rules were going to be, more or less, a push because of our CBA. Now I'm told to stand by for a year or so of significant loss of quality of life while ALPA figures these "new" regulations out?
Representation fail..... Again....
How exactly is this a "representational fail"? We're not in negotiations. The company has chosen to work within the framework of our existing PWA. Additionally, I don't think anybody is stating that there will be a "significant loss of quality of life". I think they're just saying - stand by for some changes.
We understand that these FAR changes, while improving fatigue mitigation, may negatively impact certain quality of life aspects of your rotations. We are influencing changes where possible in the January bid packages, but it is likely there will still be many opportunities for enhancement.
Honestly, these regulations have been pretty fluid since their proposal. Just read through the interpretations. I don't think anybody, including ALPA or the airlines, have gotten a grip on the unintended consequences in Part 117.
But please, what would you rather ALPA do? Seriously? Would you rather they sign a quid pro quo LOA? Would you rather they offer no communication up front? Would you rather they not take part in the process and stomp their feet like children?
Really, I don't mean this post to sound antagonistic. But please, tell me how DALPA failed in this case. Because, to me, when you blame them for the sun coming up in the east and setting in the west, you lose a little credibility.