Originally Posted by vprMatrix

Sure, I think that what ALPA, and the FAA, is trying to do is good, however this is not like negotiations. There is a lot of pressure on the FAA to make changes to these rules right now and there was no reason for ALPA to "give" 9 hrs on the flight time limit, in fact I don't feel that there was any reason to change the 8 hr limit either up or down, if the duty limits are implemented the fatigue issue is solved.

For a lot of the regional airlines this will result an overall improvement to their schedules however, as you said, it could result in more days of flying. On the other hand, most mainline airlines are in high compliance with these rules already (just my guess) and the 9 hour flight time is a big win for airline managements.

If you think that 9 hours of flight time will have no impact on your flying you aren't being very realistic with regard to not only the Caribbean flying but also the west cost turns. The 9 hour rule will result in higher productivity and the need for fewer staged crews which will result in the need for fewer pilots.

I believe that you have made the argument that Delta's avg productivity increase over pre 9/11 and bankruptcy numbers has resulted in a sizable decrease in the total numbers of pilots. If you don't think that the 9 hr rule and the introduction of cross country turns as well as the Caribbean turns you are not being honest about the issue. At least with the more restrictive duty limits there will be some offsetting of the productivity increases.

Over the last 8 years there has been a lot of giving in the productivity area there is no need for ALPA to propose any increase block hours and allow further increases. That is my problem with the proposal. Let the APA make the increased productivity proposals.