Originally Posted by
Starcheck102
DAL 88 Driver,
This is from the Federal Register. You have seen it before, which makes me wonder why you persist with your flawed reasoning:
A sleep opportunity generally commences once a flightcrew member is at a location where the flightcrew member can reasonably be expected to go to sleep and not have that sleep interrupted. The sleep opportunity does not need to take place at the flightcrew member’s home, but it must take place at a location where the flightcrew member can reasonably expect to obtain 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. In addition, as the FAA pointed out in the preamble to final rule, specific sleep situations ‘‘are difficult to capture in a regulatory standard.’’ That is why § 117.25(f) requires the flightcrew member to notify the certificate holder if the flightcrew member determines that he or she cannot get the requisite amount of uninterrupted sleep.
2. Interruptions to the Sleep Opportunity That Are Not Caused by Carrier
A4A, APA, and AE asked whether an interruption not from the air carrier, such as a hotel fire alarm, would interrupt the 8-hour sleep opportunity. A4A and AE asked whether the flightcrew member is required to inform the carrier if a sleep opportunity has been interrupted.
Subsection 117.25(f) requires a flightcrew member to notify the air carrier if the flightcrew member determines that his/her rest period will not provide 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. This section provides the flightcrew member with discretion to determine whether his or her sleep has been interrupted. However, if the flightcrew member determines that his/her sleep has been interrupted, then the flightcrew member must notify the air carrier of the interruption. For this determination, it is irrelevant whether the interruption to the flightcrew member’s sleep was caused by the air carrier.
Taking the fire alarm example, if the fire alarm sounds for only a few seconds, some flightcrew members may have no problem getting back to sleep, and they may determine that their sleep was not interrupted. Conversely, other flightcrew members may find it difficult to get back to sleep even if their sleep was interrupted for only a short period of time. These flightcrew members may determine that their sleep opportunity was interrupted, at which point they would have to notify the carrier of the interruption.
If you're tired, don't fly.
None of that demonstrates any "flawed reasoning" on my part. Quite the opposite, it demonstrates your flawed reasoning.
Here's the FAR verbatim:
FAR 117.25
(e) No certificate holder may schedule and no flightcrew member may accept an assignment for any reserve or flight duty period unless the flightcrew member is given a rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours immediately before beginning the reserve or flight duty period measured from the time the flightcrew member is released from duty. The 10 hour rest period must provide the flightcrew member with a minimum of 8 uninterrupted hours of sleep opportunity.
What part of "minimum of 8 uninterrupted hours of sleep opportunity" do you not understand? The FAR requires that we have an opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. It doesn't require that we actually sleep 8 hours, and it leaves it to the individual crew member to determine whether or not he/she is adequately rested. But it does require that we have an opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep.
Ask yourself the following two questions:
1 - Does the FAR require an opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep?
2 - With exactly 8 hours "behind the door" in a hotel room, does any human being have the opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep?
As I see it, there are basically two issues here. And that is the reason I'm making such a big deal about it.
First issue: DALPA, by creatively interpreting this to mean exactly the same as our contractual "8 hours behind the door" is encouraging the company to do the same. After all, it's to the company's benefit if they can minimize flight delays.
I had an experience with this exact issue a couple of trips ago. (Didn't expect to have to test this so soon.) At that time, the crew tracker I worked with over the phone totally agreed with me that I needed the opportunity to sleep for 8 hours (I was already in the hotel room and ready for bed when the issue occurred) and that the pickup time would have to be adjusted to accommodate not only 8 hours of sleep from that point but also enough time to get up and get ready the next morning. How long do you think it's going to take before the company seizes the opportunity DALPA is providing them to redefine it to where we are only entitled to "8 hours behind the door?" Next time I talk to a crew tracker in this situation, I might not get the same answer.
Second issue: By putting out this erroneous interpretation of the FAR, DALPA is encouraging Delta pilots to violate the law. Certainly, there are some of us (myself included) who aren't buying it. But there are a significant number of pilots here who rely on the information provided to them by DALPA.
What do you think would happen if a flight crew agreed to "8 hours behind the door" and then, heaven forbid, had some kind of incident or accident the next morning? When the FAA investigates and finds out that they only had 8 hours in the hotel room, they will be in violation of the FAR and they're going to get hung out to dry. I don't think "because DALPA told me that's okay" is going to be a satisfactory answer.
And if you still don't believe me (which I'm sure you probably don't... because you DALPA guys are always the smartest guys in the room), consider the following, which I found on the FAA's web site:
LINK
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Parts 117, 119, and 121
Docket No.: FAA-2009-1093; Amdt. Nos. 117-1, 119-16, 121-357
RIN 2120–AJ58
Flightcrew Member Duty and Rest Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule
Excerpt:
The FAA notes that, while some of the studies used in the final rule have not been validated in the aviation context, the major provisions of this rule are based on uncontroversial scientific findings that apply to all human beings. As the NPRM pointed out, sleep science, while still evolving, is clear in several important respects: most people need eight hours of sleep to function effectively, most people find it more difficult to sleep during the day than during the night, resulting in greater fatigue if working at night; the longer one has been awake and the longer one spends on task, the greater the likelihood of fatigue; and fatigue leads to an increased risk of making a mistake.
These uncontroversial scientific findings form the basis for almost all of the major provisions in this rule. The FAA has concluded that, even though some of these findings were not based on aviation data, flightcrew members have the same fatigue concerns as other human beings, and as such, there is no reason to believe that these findings would not apply to flightcrew members.
Again, here is the FAR in question:
FAR 117.25
(e) No certificate holder may schedule and no flightcrew member may accept
an assignment for any reserve or flight duty period unless the flightcrew member is given a rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours immediately before beginning the reserve or flight duty period measured from the time the flightcrew member is released from duty. The 10 hour rest period must provide the flightcrew member with a minimum of 8 uninterrupted hours of sleep opportunity.
If it was supposed to mean 8 hours behind the door, then that part of the FAR would have read something like this: "The 10 hour rest period must provide the flightcrew member with a minimum of 8 hours in the hotel behind the door, during which the flightcrew member has an uninterrupted sleep opportunity."
Any questions?