Originally Posted by
Pineapple Guy
Of course, no one will argue that 9 hrs is less fatiguing than 8. However, ALPA's proposal, taken as a whole, does much to reduce fatigue. I see CAPA taking the APA route -> grandstand, pound their chest, and then when none of their inputs are taken, cry.
ALPA, on the other hand, uses science to craft an overall proposal that, in total, reduces the fatigue significantly. They work quietly behind the scenes to actually have an impact on the final outcome. Pilots are awarded with a much improved, though not perfect, solution to the age old problem of fatigue.
You call it pounding your chest, I call it representing CAPA's constituents. And what science? Show me a study that supports your argument. 1 study to support raising the ft to 9 hours as ALPA proposed. You just said yourself 9 hours is more fatiguing than 8.
You have to take a stand for the intent of the rules. It is to reduce fatigue, not cave to outside interest or use it as a horse trade. These issues are some of the most important to come along in some time. They will have a huge impact on all our careers. ALPA won't even stand up for what is right in the rule making process. How can we expect them to fight a real fight. Oh wait, we can't. That was already proven after 9-11. You can't defend the indefensible.