|
|
Originally Posted by johnso29
(Post 1299975)
Unless something has recently changed, the FO IS allowed to taxi the airplane. I guess I'd better do a refresher to make sure.
I didnt notice that he said not allowed to taxi. That is not correct! |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1299980)
Yep... its required for the FO to taxi the plane if the CA is doing the WDR on the move. All FOs are qualified to taxi on a straightaway... and all airbus pilots are universally qualified to taxi.
I didnt notice that he said not allowed to taxi. That is not correct! |
Originally Posted by Elvis90
(Post 1299912)
I think this FOM change regarding PA's will be changed or deleted due to lack of interest. It just can't be enforced with the sheer number of flights we have everyday. I think the right answer is that it's a recommendation that passengers appreciate, but making it a "thou shalt...", regardless of any common sense, will not win over the pilot group.
It's a "push to test" by the company to see how much they can sneak in before DALPA squawks. RA won't be here forever. Sleepy Ed (or another high-functioning sociopath) is waiting in the wings. Do the math. |
Originally Posted by FrankCobretti
(Post 1299674)
Uniform inspections? Pfft. Chief Pilots don't work weekends and holidays.
|
Originally Posted by RepublicofTexas
(Post 1299890)
Remind me again what the FOB says. Does it say, "Will" or "Should" Is this a rewash of 7.5?
"Will" would mean a change in the job description, "Should" is a suggestion. The FOM defines 'should' as follows- "The word 'should' is used to indicate that compliance is expected. Deviations are permitted only where an operational requirement exists." The word 'may' is used when compliance is not mandatory. |
Originally Posted by flyallnite
(Post 1299991)
Wrong.
The FOM defines 'should' as follows- "The word 'should' is used to indicate that compliance is expected. Deviations are permitted only where an operational requirement exists." The word 'may' is used when compliance is not mandatory. |
Originally Posted by Purple Drank
(Post 1299983)
This policy doesn't need to be enforced immediately or often to cause problems down the road. It's the precedent we need to worry about.
It's a "push to test" by the company to see how much they can sneak in before DALPA squawks. RA won't be here forever. Sleepy Ed (or another high-functioning sociopath) is waiting in the wings. Do the math. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 1299980)
Yep... its required for the FO to taxi the plane if the CA is doing the WDR on the move. All FOs are qualified to taxi on a straightaway... and all airbus pilots are universally qualified to taxi. I didnt notice that he said not allowed to taxi. That is not correct! I mean we all know how we apparently feel about bulletin policy. And don't tell me that just because the manual doesn't reference it makes it ok, because of past practice. Because if the FO goes in the ditch, you know they'll hang them because they shouldn't have been doing it per an absent reference. So either my 5 minute keyword search in the manuals was inaccurate or...... I'm not advocating for FOs to not taxi either. I think they should be taxiing the aircraft when the CA analyzes the WDR - and I would be happy to do so, under CA's authority. Specifically what I said was that DAL can not, or will not specify this issue in the manuals. Hence my concern over 80kt's statement that the manual change accurately chased the normalization of deviance. |
Originally Posted by flyallnite
(Post 1299309)
And so you'll be intentionally violating the FOM. You may or may not be called on the carpet for that. And the many new hires we're about to get could face termination.
This isn't the old Delta, slap on the back have a nice day. I don't ever want to be in a position where I'm explaining myself to the CP these days. Hey, good time to review sick usage and uniform inspection though, right? Yeah, that'll never come back to bite us either.
Originally Posted by flyallnite
(Post 1299991)
Wrong.
The FOM defines 'should' as follows- "The word 'should' is used to indicate that compliance is expected. Deviations are permitted only where an operational requirement exists." The word 'may' is used when compliance is not mandatory. Should is not mandatory. It doesn't mean will. It means should. I should comply. But, I might not. I have an operational requirement to leave Ed a message. I'll be a little while. Upon completing the message, I should flush. (JFK excepted.) Let me know if I should. Then I might. But then, I might not. I just don't know. I should know, but I don't know. Captain Enda Cision |
Anyone know if DALPA has or is going to take a stand on gatehouse PA's?
Bueller....anyone? |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:52 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands