A pilot may want to stay on the CRJ, for example, but cannot or does not want to move to the new base. Any number of factors can influence that decision, including children in school, relationships with friends, or housing costs. For instance, the cost of living in Des Moines, Iowa is considerably less than the cost of living near JFK in New York. Thus, the pilot is more likely to maintain his home in Des Moines and commute to work, reducing his days off, his free time and his overall lifestyle. That decision to stay on the CRJ will necessitate commuting to the new base. The pilot may share or lease an apartment, plan to stay with friends, or use a hotel for accommodations in the new base. Generally, economic factors determine the course of action, but the basic problem of a relocated crew base is out of the pilot’s control; it is forced by the industry and pilots cope as best they can. Most regional carriers, while they offer some expenses towards the moving of displaced crewmembers, offer little if anything to voluntary moves. The difference between voluntary and displaced movement is often a blurred line between having a job and losing a job. However in today’s circumstances, even the limited monetary help a regional carrier may provide does not cover the costs of moving a family many times over a pilot’s career.
Commuting has a number of complicating factors, which include:
• employer’s sick leave and attendance-reliability policies
• very few seats are available for pilots forced to commute on today’s full airplanes,
• airline policies which prohibit positive-space transportation,
• inadequate or non-existent relocation provisions, and
• commuting policies which require pilots to depart home base with several backup flights.
This difficult reality adds to the creation of stress and further increases pilot fatigue factors. ALPA encourages airline managements to work with their pilots to establish new or improved commuting policies and scheduling practices that take into account these lifestyle issues.
Safety Data and Reporting Programs
What should be done to make improvements now while we are implementing the previously discussed changes in training and qualifications? There are programs available to the aviation industry today, such as Flight Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA) and Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP), that can provide important and needed oversight information, not only internally within air carriers, but also for the overall air transportation system. The safety data provided by these programs are making differences in safety and efficiency of air carrier operations. Approximately 90 percent of the data provided through ASAP is sole-source data. This is safety data that will not and cannot be gathered by other means and it can be critical and essential to improve the safety performance of our industry.
Safety Management Systems (SMS) are mandated by ICAO standards. SMS programs are being developed for use by U.S. aviation entities. Safety reporting and safety data are intrinsic in SMS programs and ASAP and FOQA should be an integral part of any SMS.
In order to make the data more readily obtained and available for safety improvements only, protections need to be put in place that will limit the data use in civil liability cases. Restraints also need to be strengthened for the use of the data for safety purposes only. The data has an important safety benefit and it must not be compromised. Unless there are improved protections that will limit the use of the data to solely safety purposes, the flow of reports will cease. These programs are a critical safety benefit for the industry that need to be nurtured, protected, and promoted at all levels of the air carrier industry.