Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Delta (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/)
-   -   Dickson and ALPA (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/122752-dickson-alpa.html)

deltabound 07-14-2019 03:15 PM


Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 2852465)
She is certainly deadset against commuters getting PS to work and feels it’s a huge safety issue. She also believes it counts as duty time under FAR117 and Delta is in violation of FAR117 when PS is granted.

It's a reasonable argument. (But for lawyers, not line pilots, to make. Big difference)

A big fear when the Part 117 rules were being hashed out was that commuting to work was going to be counted as effectively "on duty." It was initially proposed, but retracted due to the virtual elimination of pilots being able to commute to work on their own time. Pilots would pretty much have to live in base....a huge can of worms for so many reasons.

Fatigue was cited as a contributing factor in the Colgan Air crash that spurred the Part 117 rules. The copilot had been (legally) commuting for long hours into position before reporting for duty.

The flying public would be appalled to know that it's perfectly legal for pilots to commute all night, sleep a couple hours in a crew room, slam back some coffee, then fly a 13 hour scheduled day. As long as they state, "Why no, I'm not fatigued. Not at all."

Herkflyr 07-14-2019 03:38 PM


Originally Posted by deltabound (Post 2853175)
It's a reasonable argument. (But for lawyers, not line pilots, to make. Big difference)

A big fear when the Part 117 rules were being hashed out was that commuting to work was going to be counted as effectively "on duty." It was initially proposed, but retracted due to the virtual elimination of pilots being able to commute to work on their own time. Pilots would pretty much have to live in base....a huge can of worms for so many reasons.

Fatigue was cited as a contributing factor in the Colgan Air crash that spurred the Part 117 rules. The copilot had been (legally) commuting for long hours into position before reporting for duty.

The flying public would be appalled to know that it's perfectly legal for pilots to commute all night, sleep a couple hours in a crew room, slam back some coffee, then fly a 13 hour scheduled day. As long as they state, "Why no, I'm not fatigued. Not at all."

It's also perfectly legal for a non-commuter to be up half the night with a crying infant, have an 0600 report, meaning he or she is waking up at 4 (not even including said crying baby), get stuck on I-285 after a tractor trailer jackknifes, and then fly a long duty day, with a few swigs of coffee to keep them going.

We can always find statistical outliers. At some point we have to be able to grant a pilot the benefit of the doubt regarding their own rest state and fitness for duty.

BobZ 07-14-2019 04:13 PM


Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 2853182)
It's also perfectly legal for a non-commuter to be up half the night with a crying infant, have an 0600 report, meaning he or she is waking up at 4 (not even including said crying baby), get stuck on I-285 after a tractor trailer jackknifes, and then fly a long duty day, with a few swigs of coffee to keep them going.

We can always find statistical outliers. At some point we have to be able to grant a pilot the benefit of the doubt regarding their own rest state and fitness for duty.

She wasnt an infant. She told me she was 18!......

Cheers....J Epstein.

OOfff 07-14-2019 05:11 PM


Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 2853182)
It's also perfectly legal for a non-commuter to be up half the night with a crying infant, have an 0600 report, meaning he or she is waking up at 4 (not even including said crying baby), get stuck on I-285 after a tractor trailer jackknifes, and then fly a long duty day, with a few swigs of coffee to keep them going.

We can always find statistical outliers. At some point we have to be able to grant a pilot the benefit of the doubt regarding their own rest state and fitness for duty.

But then why count front end deadheads as duty?

forgot to bid 07-14-2019 05:45 PM


Originally Posted by BobZ (Post 2853203)
She wasnt an infant. I made her tell me she was 18!......

Cheers....J Epstein.

FIFY.........

forgot to bid 07-14-2019 05:47 PM


Originally Posted by Herkflyr (Post 2853182)
It's also perfectly legal for a non-commuter to be up half the night with a crying infant, have an 0600 report, meaning he or she is waking up at 4 (not even including said crying baby), get stuck on I-285 after a tractor trailer jackknifes, and then fly a long duty day, with a few swigs of coffee to keep them going.

We can always find statistical outliers. At some point we have to be able to grant a pilot the benefit of the doubt regarding their own rest state and fitness for duty.

I'd been lucky with all 3 of mine if I had ever gotten a half nights sleep before work. Im kind of glad I don't know how little it was and how long the longest bit of sleep even got to.

And I live in base.

sailingfun 07-15-2019 03:23 AM

Let me first say I have commuted most of my career. The standard argument that pilots who live in base can be just as fatigued as commuters really does not carry much weight. Yes there are many reasons someone can be tired before a trip. Commuters have all the exact same issues as pilots living in base AND they have to commute to work.
I think commuting is safe when properly managed just like living in base. The problems come from a minority of commuters who choose to do things like catch a all-nighter from HNL to LAX to connect LAX to ATL and start a 6 day international trip. We are one accident away from the end of commuting as we know it because a minority of commuters can’t do it responsibly.

Herkflyr 07-15-2019 04:20 AM


Originally Posted by sailingfun (Post 2853349)
Let me first say I have commuted most of my career. The standard argument that pilots who live in base can be just as fatigued as commuters really does not carry much weight. Yes there are many reasons someone can be tired before a trip. Commuters have all the exact same issues as pilots living in base AND they have to commute to work.

I think commuting is safe when properly managed just like living in base. The problems come from a minority of commuters who choose to do things like catch a all-nighter from HNL to LAX to connect LAX to ATL and start a 6 day international trip. We are one accident away from the end of commuting as we know it because a minority of commuters can’t do it responsibly.

As someone who has commuted and lived in base, I agree. You make good points.

notEnuf 07-15-2019 05:43 AM

I've done both. Now, I choose to live in base because my QOL is light yeas ahead of when I commuted. I got in to this career partly because I could live anywhere. After marriage and kids my priorities changed. I don't think anyone should be forced to live in base but rest is everyone's individual responsibility, both before reporting and after. I do think it's the out layer who will ruin it for everyone if/when.

JamesNoBrakes 07-15-2019 06:29 AM


Originally Posted by marcal (Post 2849161)
M comment on this issue from another thread:

"After reading that, I would have pulled her from the line for mental testing as well. Why? Bc she’s as senior as it gets and decided to make a mountain out of a molehill by going so high up in the chain with pretty baseless accusations, ie no safety reporting? She mentioned a few “incidents” that could have been worse and while correct, we were trained in each CQ cycle as well as safety bulletins, etc. regarding them. Based on her blogs and books, it’s obvious she wanted(wants) to build a name for herself. The fact that she is going after management pay for lack of interviews for a position is galling. She knew this would only lead to problems and if she didn’t than she doesn’t have the SA that I want in a pilot upfront. She should have been filling out ASAPs and FCRs on her NRT layovers, not running from department to department screaming “fire” where there really is none."

The problem is, the correct action would be a personnel action against said employee, whether a sanction, suspension, or termination, not a mental health evaluation and pull from flight duty. This is a discipline and behavior issue. If said employee wants to then pull the mental health card after that action, they would be more than welcome, as that would automatically remove them from flying duty by their own accord. The more and more I hear about this story, the more it sounds like a befuddled/hasty attempt to "silence" an employee, without understanding or thinking about the repercussions.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:41 AM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands