Nitefrater

No problem, just give me time to arrange for the FAA to attend the chat too.

USN2FEDEX

From our Handy ALPA Calendar:

"As a FedEx pilot traveling within 72 hours of a VIPs Calendar activity, you are authorized by flight management to utilize Business priority ANYTIME"

That will help.

flapsfail

Forgive my ignorance but how will this new policy change for offline jumpseaters? Is there a new way we are to list for a Jumpseat?
Thanks in advance.

FrankTheTank

bingo.....

TonyC

If you're looking at the CFR you can see that I've quoted the CFR -- that's Code of Federal Regulations. (Here's a link to the "electronic" version: eCFR ? Code of Federal Regulations ) (Sidenote: Our "Company manual" still refers to them as FARs.)

I didn't quote subparagraphs (b) or (c) because they don't apply to the present discussion. Subparagraph (b) excludes employees admitted under (a)(3) who are employees of departments not directly related to flight operations. Subparagraph (c) deals with the requirement for a seat outside the cockpit for those admitted to the cockpit in subparagraph (a). If they are not admitted by (a) to the cockpit in the first place, there's no need to look at (c).



No, that would be (a)(3)(ii)(b). Let me repeat the applicable portions in a format that makes it read a little more clearly.

CFR § 121.547 Admission to flight deck.For some insight into what the FAA thinks that means, dive into Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System.

Specifically, look at Volume 3 (GENERAL TECHNICAL ADMINISTRATION), Chapter 2, Section 1 Exemptions, Deviations, Waivers, and Authorizations.
(web: FSIMS Document Viewer
PDF: http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v0...01_chg_60a.pdf )

Pay close attention to Table 3-0, Compliance Table: Admission to Flight Deck. For each category of "Authorized person" there is a column which states the "Applicable Regulation" which permits flight deck access, the "Authorization Circumstances (Who the Administrator is allowing)", whether "Seat in back required", and "Security Information ID, Form, or Other".

(This table dates back to Notice N 8000.356 "Access to Air Carrier Flight Decks and Revision to OpSpec A048")

Take a look at the Authorized Position "An employee of a part 121 certificate holder whose duties are such that admission to the flight deck is necessary or advantageous for safe operations". In the 3rd column, "Authorization Circumstances (Who the Administrator is allowing)", we see lots of folks listed. Who's first?That's the section that, as you said, "Allows for certificated airmen to ride in the flight deck of aircraft for which they are employed."




As far as OAL jumpseating goes, that's covered by d) of the same line in the table. (It might be a little confusing, as the table encounters a "page break" in the NOTICE, so it looks at first glance to be a new line. Actually, it's a continuation of the same line in the table onto the following page. The table format was retained in the FAA Order 8900.1 FSIMS.) Item d) is:Yes, and when I show up for work and pull up the Flight Plan I can see the person's booking status (a status in the eyes of Jumpseat Administration that has nothing to do with the FAA and the CFR) and cockpit eligibility as viewed by Jumpseat Administration. (Their interpretation of "cockpit eligible" might be correct, but if it's not, nobody from Jumpseat Administration is going to help me defend myself to the FAA.) The jumpseat listing is not available to me 12 hours prior to the flight, the time when The Company has asked me to advise a jumpseater if I don't intend to permit him or her in the cockpit.


Oh, but they do delineate. A dispatcher is permitted on the flight deck when his presence is necessary to perform his duties, not when he's traveling on his off time to visit Aunt Suzie. An animal handler is permitted on the flight deck when it is necessary for him to perform animal handler duties, not when it just happens to be the quickest ride from Narita to Memphis. For mechanics, the regulation requires that a mechanic's "admission to the flightdeck is necessary or advantageous for safe operation", and the FAA Order explains that the mechanic must be "on-duty."

No such caveat applies to off-duty pilots.



It's a different world since September 11, 2001.

Some people still bring cookies, but the practice is not as common.


Under most circumstances, I'll do anything I can to carry eligible jumpseaters. However, I will not knowingly and willingly violate the CFR to do so.






.

kronan

To me-the relevant person being admitted under the CFRs is

(4) Any person who has the permission of the pilot in command, an appropriate management official of the part 119 certificate holder and the Administrator. Paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not limit the emergency authority of the pilot in command to exclude any person from the flightdeck in the interests of safety.

We can certainly argue that the decision to allow mechanics into the cockpit wasn't done by an "Appropriate management official"- but, IMO, the mere fact that the FCIF was published indicates tacit approval.
Argument hinges on whether our POI is allowed to act for the Administrator. Certainly not a great argument to argue this decision isn't consistent with guidance from HHQ. Shoot, look at the fact that FedEx's sector of the FAA has locked cockpit doors while UPS was exempt

And, personally, I read 121.583 (e) as authorization for the PIC to admit ANY company employee to the cockpit. So, why should J/S admin have the Veto over your authority to allow a mechanic to ride the J/S if the cockpit door is MEL'd?

121.583 (e) The pilot in command may authorize a person covered by paragraph (a) of this section to be admitted to the crew compartment of the airplane

eCFR ? Code of Federal Regulations

Deespatcher

I cut down a lot of he post above because, for the most part i agree. But, as far as dispatchers go, the general interpretation is that due to training requirements of 14CFR Part 121.463(a)(2) that their presence on the flight deck is necessary to perform their duties .. It may be a stretch, but it is technically, and in legalese, applicable. And as you point out, the only "on-duty" requirement in 8900 is for Mechanics in the "ie" section. It also seems odd that our friends at the FAA would allow Dispatchers CASS access and OAL jumpseat privilege while denying them the same access on their own carrier. Thus, we can use jumpseats to go see Aunt Suzie.

As far as commuting mechanics, our manual allows them to occupy cockpit jumpseats (since that's all we have). This manual is approved by the DO (or " an appropriate management official of the part 119 certificate holder") and our POI ( by proxy "the Administrator") per 121.547(a)(4). If your manual does not, then you are correct on the mechanics, vis-a-vis 8900. Mechanics, not having the same flight deck access requirement for training, do not fall under the "part 119 certificate holder and whose duties are such that admission to the flightdeck is necessary".

Of course, all are subject to the permission of the pilot in command. And asking you to deny/accept 12 hours out is IMHO. That being said, It's time for coffee and I'll blame any mistakes on lack of caffeine.

nakazawa

There’s certainly a difference between ‘booking’, and ‘permission’. What appears to be happening now is, the non-crew members will be booked in the cockpit without the knowledge of the Captain, and on review of the release 1 hour prior to push-back, he’ll realize there’s a non-crewmember cockpit jumpseater. He’s THEN obligated to either take the jumpseater, or explain in a letter to the VP Flight Ops why he bumped [him]. The FOM has a specific procedure for requesting a cockpit jumpseat. There’s also a matrix on which flights require Captain’s Permission, and how to obtain that permission.

I think the Captain’s response to an unknown cockpit jumpseater, other than those listed with authorization (FAA, LCA, CIA, etc) would be, a permission request was not received and permission was not granted. We aren’t part of the booking process.

Obtaining Captain’s Permission Procedure

Contact the Captain via e-mail and copy [email protected] in the initial request.
Reference the flight number and Z flight date in the e-mail subject line.
If the Captain approves the request he will “reply all” via e-mail stating his approval.

Right now it appears to me ALL cockpit seats on the MD and the -777 require Captain’s permission to FLY, and that’s referencing the FedEx FAA approved FOM in section 2, pages 2-36 thru about 2-40.

HKFlyr

As I understand it...and after some time reviewing the FAA policy and the documents discussed by Tony earlier..I offer the following 2.5 HKD's worth of opinion:

The current FCIF and "policy" clearly conflicts with the FAR that states a mechanic can occupy a Cockpit seat if "on duty" and is required to be perform duties on the flight deck. (Pilots are allowed in the cockpit off duty-clearly stated)

On duty is defined under the FARs. Personal jumpseats doesn't even come close to meeting that requirement or definition.

Several POIs have made mistakes in the past on this issue and after being reminded through letters and conversations with the FAA from ALPA legal, and FAA HHQ, these poorly implemented policies have been rescinded.(don't believe me, contact our MEC JUMPSEAT chair and ask for case history on these issues, all a matter or record)

Hopefully someone will take up this issue, to protect our pilots before we have an incident where a PIC denies a mechanic last minute. A PIC could very well feel that he would be violating the FAR by allowing him off duty to ride in the cockpit. (And then said PIC is talked to by a FCA about not bumping him 12 hours earlier...)

(Also, the mechanics now enjoy a status we don't get when we book thru JUMPSEAT admin - booked and confirmed in the cockpit)

I personally would recommend that pilots within 3 days of any event for Fedex book business, as is allowed. Don't book staging - business. You have priority and won't be bumped by a mechanic.

And just an observation..Soon we will be seeing a significant reduction in the amount of jumpseats due to the AC changes in our system. With the reduction of commercial flights into Memphis, life is getting tougher as a commuter.

I would recommend a conversation with your block rep on this issue to make sure he has been fully briefed and understands the implications of this questionable new policy. (and the jeopardy our PICs could face and difficulty any crew member could have getting a ride to work)

And for the record, I have no problems with Mech's riding...I welcome them. I am more concerned with the policy and chilling of PIC authority that could take place.



The bottom line is that for a mechanic to ride in cockpit,

FDXLAG

A very good solution to a problem the company would prefer not to address.