Safe Skies (fall 2007) 8 in 24...
 

FedEx just stopped and gave me my Safe Skies for Fall 2007. Page 2 starts a big explanation on 8 in 24 "from the Flight Duty Officers" interpretation of FAR 121.505.

If you have an "Air Turn Back" or a (non-cargo) diversion to another airport. Crew scheduling can revise your trip add another flight segment and you can knowingly takeoff and fly over 8 hr in 24.

While the article does mention safety...the last sentence is, "This is intended to help you understand the legal issues in flight and duty times which, in turn, contribute to a more reliable operation for our customers."

In the last 15 years I have never heard of such interpretation...I hope the Union Leadership steps forward again...and gives us their interpretation.

BWP

From the CBA:

Domestic Block Hour Limitations

1. A pilot shall not be scheduled as an operating crew member in excess of 8 block hours during a single duty period or during any consecutive 24 hour period, except as provided in Section 12.C.2.b.
2. A pilot may be scheduled as an operating crew member to exceed 8 block hours during any 24 consecutive hours. Prior to exceeding 8 ABH in that period, however, he shall have received an intervening legal rest period of twice the block hours flown since his last legal rest period, or 9 hours, whichever is greater, except as provided in Section 12.C.2.c.ii., or iii.
3. A pilot originally scheduled under Section 12.C.2.a., or b., but who, due to headwinds, ATC delays or other unavoidable circumstances (including an intermediate stop for these reasons) is projected to exceed the limitations contained in those paragraphs, may continue to the extent permitted by FAR regulations. Duty time and rest limitations as provided in Section 12.C.5. and C.6. still apply.
1. A pilot who, due to headwinds, ATC delays or other unavoidable circumstances (including an intermediate stop for these reasons) is projected to exceed 8 ABH without an intervening legal rest period, shall be permitted to continue to base or to his layover station, whichever is scheduled to occur first, at which point he shall receive a legal rest period. However, a crew shall not block-out from a location after having exceeded 8 hours of block time in a 24 hour period without a legal rest period.
2. If a pilot is originally scheduled to exceed 8 block hours in 24 consecutive hours, as provided in Section 12.C.2.b. (above), but due to headwinds, ATC delays or other unavoidable circumstances (including any intermediate stops for these reasons), cannot receive the minimum required legal rest period, the following shall apply:

(a) he may be rescheduled for a legal rest period of at least twice the block hours flown since his last legal rest period, but not less than 8 hours; or
(b) his schedule may be revised to not exceed 8 block hours in 24 consecutive hours; or
(c) he may be replaced (and shall earn trip guarantee).

3. If a pilot departs his base on a flight and makes an unscheduled return to that base without an intervening stop and he is then projected to exceed 8 block hours in that same duty period, the Company shall employ one of the following options:

(a) reschedule the pilot so as not to exceed 8 block hours; or
(b) schedule the pilot for a legal rest period at base to ensure future legality; or
(c) remove the pilot, and, if he is not a MUV, MUS, CMU, AFB, VLT, or DRF pilot, he shall be eligible for substitution; or
(d) remove the pilot, and, if he is a MUV, MUS, CMU, AFB, VLT, or DRF pilot, compensate him the greater of 3 CH, ABH or duty rig computed from his scheduled showtime until his actual release.

As usual, the company stated what is allowed by the FARs, but left out what is in the contract. Legally, you could agree to what the company stated, but it would be like flying a DP, or waving your 1 in 10. (Giving up what the union has worked to achieve in order to protect the crew's safety.)

I just had that scenario happen last month. We diverted on the outbound leg of a hub turn for wx. The captain would have exceed 8 block hours if we turned again and went to the orignial destination as GOC and the duty officer wanted us to do. The captain finally said he was just too tired (fatigued) and that ended that. Neither he or the two captain jumpseaters thought it was legal to fly the leg and knowingly exceed 8-24, so the safe skies article certainly explains the company's stance on the issue.

I don't know if cargo is different, but at ExpressJet and Continental 8 hrs scheduled, good to start good to finish. If you divert, it is beyond the company's control, and as such you can continue on all remaining originally scheduled legs and exceed 8 hours of flying. They just can't reassign you another turn.
For Example:
EWR Trip: Raleigh Turn & Boston Turn worth 7:58
Holding into EWR, divert to PHL, Continue to EWR after refuel. Still legal for Boston Turn since the diversion was beyond company control. Good to start good to finish. Might fly 9+ hours that day as long as you don't exceed 16 hours of active duty time under the "Whitlow" interpretation of 16 hour duty day.
However, now lets say that you come in from your PHL diversion, and they want to reassign you a PVD turn. This PVD turn is worth less than the BOS turn so logic would say that is ok. Wrong, you're only good for what you were originally scheduled to do. Any "reassignment" (even if logic would say that it is better/less flying) must now include the diversion as part of the "scheduled" flight time in a 24hr period. But if they leave you on the BOS turn, which is more flying, you're good to go. Hence the complete lack of common sense of good to start good to finish.
I don't know if you guys have "contractual rules" but even then, under the Railway Labor Act it is still fly now grieve later, unless it's a FAA rule. The FAA says that diversions for weather (including winds) or MX don't count for "scheduled" flight time, but must be included in "re-scheduled(/re-assigned)" flight time.

If you were not scheduled over 8 hrs originally, you can go over 8 hours with no legal problem and no violation of the contract, as long as you don't depart an airport having already exceeded 8 hours and you get a legal [at least 16 hours] rest period after you land at your layover station or home base. It is in Section 12.C.2.c.i

"A pilot who, due to headwinds, ATC delays or other unavoidable circumstances (including an intermediate stop for these reasons) is projected to exceed 8 ABH without an intervening legal rest period, shall be permitted to continue to base or to his layover station, whichever is scheduled to occur first, at which point he shall receive a legal rest period. However, a crew shall not block-out from a location after having exceeded 8 hours of block time in a 24 hour period without a legal rest period." (referenced in red as No. 1 above)

So I have to disagree with Fedupbusdriver, it's legal and in the contract to make you continue to your destination, as long as you have not already exceeded the 8 in 24. Your only recourse is to call fatigue.

OK here is a likely scenario.

You flew outbound from MEM on the Afternoon sort to SLC. You incurred a 35 minute taxi delay in MEM and exceeded schedule by 35 minutes. MEM-SLC was scheduled for 3:30 but you actually blocked 4:05. You had a short 11 hours rest in the hotel and flew SLC-MEM the next morning and blocked 3:55.

You have just flown 8 in 24 but you did have an 11 hour break in between.

But now you are hubutrning and are scheduled to fly to MEM-SMF.
It is scheduled for 4:10.

Since you just blocked 3:55 coming in from SLC and are in YOUR BASE and know the scheduled flight time to SMF is 4:10, you already know before you man up that you are going to exceed 8 hours again.

In this instance are you saying it is legal to GO?

I didn't say it wasn't legal, just that they left some of it out. Specifically: shall be permitted to continue to base or to his layover station, whichever is scheduled to occur first.

Also, that if you continue, they must then give you the applicable crew rest period, which in most hub turn instances, will not work for system form the next day.

Well, you picked the worst possible case, in that your first two legs blocked exactly 8 hours. If the block time was 8:01, no you would not go. However, given your scenario, theoretically, you would be legal to go, but would need the long rest period in SMF. Also, something to consider would be your block out time the night before and your scheduled block out time for the MEM-SMF leg. If the block out for SMF is less than 24 hours from your original blockout, you have just exceeded 8 in 24. If you had to ATB or divert, you would be dead in the water on reaching MEM or your divert field, as you can't depart on another leg if you have actually exceeded 8 in 24, only if you are scheduled to. Your scenario, with the intervening 11 hr rest, is an almost textbook definition of scheduling to fly greater than 8 in 24 as defined in Section 12.C.2.b.

"A pilot may be scheduled as an operating crew member to exceed 8 block hours during any 24 consecutive hours. Prior to exceeding 8 ABH in that period, however, he shall have received an intervening legal rest period of twice the block hours flown since his last legal rest period, or 9 hours, whichever is greater,"

That being said, since the crew is probably not scheduled for a long layover in SMF. If they are not, then they would probably be pulled and put in SUB. The company hates to delay flights due to mandatory rest if they have another way out. This happened to me a lot on the DC10 when we had pure lines of SAN trips. We would have been perfectly legal to turn back to SAN, but would need a 16 hr layover. Since only 12:30 or so was scheduled, we got pulled for 8 in 24.

And for fedupbusdriver, sorry, I thought you were saying it was not legal by the CBA. Your mention of DPs and waiving 1 in 10 confused me. As far as I can tell, the crewmember is not given a choice in the matter. The company has choices if a legal intervening rest period cannot be obtained, or if the crew is scheduled to exceed 8 due to an unscheduled return to that base without an intervening stop, but as far as I can see from reading Section 12.C.2., the crewmember is not the deciding factor, short of calling in fatigued if he cannot live with the company's chosen option.

Legal, probably yes, per the CBA no. The issue here is that you are in Domicile, and there is no reason to exceed 8 hours in a single duty period when launching from base. I have had this exact scenario a couple times and been removed from the outbound trip. The CBA language is as follows:

c. A pilot originally scheduled under Section 12.C.2.a. or b., but
who, due to headwinds, ATC delays or other unavoidable
circumstances (including an intermediate stop for these
reasons) is projected to exceed the limitations contained in
those paragraphs, may continue to the extent permitted by
FAR regulations. Duty time and rest limitations as provided
in Section 12.C.5. and C.6. still apply.
i. A pilot who, due to headwinds, ATC delays or other
unavoidable circumstances (including an intermediate
stop for these reasons) is projected to exceed 8 ABH
without an intervening legal rest period, shall be
permitted to continue to base or to his layover station,
whichever is scheduled to occur first, at which point he
shall receive a legal rest period. However, a crew shall
not block-out from a location after having exceeded 8
hours of block

Clear as mud !

"In the last 15 years I have never heard of such interpretation...I hope the Union Leadership steps forward again...and gives us their interpretation."


The Union told me their interpretation this past spring when I called them in the middle of the night from a place on the other side of the planet to ask them if what the duty officer was telling me to do was legal, since it didn't sound right to us. Contract enforcement said "yes, it is legal. 8 in 24 (for a 2 man crew) can be violated for an air turnback or maintenance issues."

Don't hold your breath waiting for them to step forward to interpret. Just call contract enforcement for yourself.