As I pointed out earlier, at Delta we use the most restrictive of the two. If I understand that correctly, then in this case your release from duty did not occur until 2300 LCL making the scheduled rest contractually illegal to begin with.

Yeah, when I first wrote the scenario I used the 30 minute release and made it a 10 1/2 hour layover. One of my reps corrected me, saying that the 30 minute release doesn't apply to the FAR. So I'm confused on that one.

What I'm getting at with the question, though, is the contractual "8 hours behind the door" versus the FAR 117 mandate for an 8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity. To me, the verbiage in the FAR is crystal clear and not subject to any interpretation. All you have to do is answer the following two questions and, voila, you have your answer.

1 - If you only have 8 hours in a hotel room (from walking into the room to walking out of the room the next morning), do you have an opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep?

2 - Does FAR 117 require an opportunity for 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep?

Yet our Scheduling Committee Chairman and at least one LEC rep are arguing that 8 hours behind the door satisfies FAR 117. What's up with that??

....................

Understood. Thanks for the clarification on the release time. But the 30 minute release time does apply. And I agree with you. The only way I can see how they think it's legal is per this definition:

Q-71. When does a sleep opportunity begin so the 8 hours can be determined?

A-71. A sleep opportunity generally commences once a flightcrew member is at a location where the flightcrew member can reasonably be expected to go to sleep and not have that sleep interrupted, such as a hotel.

That being said, the FARs also state this:

Q-72. What should the flightcrew member do if he/she determines that an 8-hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity can't be achieved for some reason, such as delayed van rides, inability to get a room key, etc.?

A-72. The flightcrew member should advise the certificate holder as soon as possible of the need to delay the next FDP reporting time to allow for an 8-hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity.

IOW, if you or I or any other pilot determines that we aren't adequately rested then we can back up our pick up time. And the company can't do anything about it because we are backed by the law now.

Yes, that is exactly what they are using and is what they keep throwing at me in response. However, as you point out, they are leaving out a critical part of the FAR, i.e. the mandated "8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity."


I agree. We are definitely backed by the law and I would not hesitate to delay the pick up time. I need a MINIMUM of 9 hours "behind the door" in order to have any opportunity for 8 hours of sleep. And that's really pushing it... 9 1/2 is better. I will not intentionally violate an FAR, no matter who is pushing me to do so.

So the law backs us. Is our union going to back us? Right now, I can't tell. If the scheduling committee chair and at least one LEC rep get their way, ALPA's official stance is going to be that 8 hours behind the door satisfies the FAR. We're going to have a number of pilots who will take that to heart. What will happen if one of our pilots agrees to "8 hours behind the door" and then the next morning, heaven forbid, he runs off the runway. When the FAA investigates and finds out he didn't have an opportunity for 8 hours of sleep, they are going to hang him (or her) out to dry.

Johnso29 is correct. You must count the 30 minutes after blockin to find your release time. There must be 10 hours minimum between release and report for the subsequent FDP. Since the PWA details the 30 minutes as part of our post flight duties, it is by definition not rest. While your rep may have been indicating that your FDP is complete at block in (it is) your rest does not begin until 30 minutes after blockin, OR possibly later if you are required by the company to perform some other work related function (drug test, meet with the Chief Pilot, etc.)

You cannot change the pickup time on your own to satisfy this requirement. The company must assign it to you (ie Crew Tracking pushes back your report time.) Further, the rest must be prospective, meaning you must know when the rest ENDS when it is assigned to you. They can't look back in the morning, push back your report a few minutes and say you are legal.

Also of note, the pickup time at the hotel does not determine your FDP report time. It can, as you are pondering, affect your 8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity.

So, I just found out that there is no more 30/7 restriction and nothing in FAR 117 that comes close to restricting you from flying way past 30 hours in a week.

I just finished up a 4 day trip and got assigned another 4 day with one day off in between. Total flight time from Thursday to Wednesday will be close to 33 hours.

Seems as though the only thing restricting you from flying too much is the flight duty period limit of 60 hours FDP in 7 days, which would seem to be impossible to bump up against if you have a 30+ hour layover somewhere.

Be careful. If I'm right, this part of the new rule is way less restrictive than the way it used to be. Gone are the days where you would have to get a few days off after you flew a long trip worth a decent amour of time.

Good luck out there & be careful.

I have a 5 day trip worth 30 hours about 26 of it hard fly. I was looking to add a trip and started playing around with the rules auditor in icrew. Imagine my surprise when it said backing up another 5 day trip with about the same hard fly was legal.

One trip had a 32 hour layover so I had 30 in 168. Thanks but no thanks but it did make me rethink my bidding strategy.

Wow, we have some great individuals that work for us :(

For me at a minimum from arrival at the hotel to show in the lobby I would say at least 10 hrs! :p

After a flight with one of those grumpy old captains, I need about 45 min to forget about the 3 legs we just did and 15 min to get that great Admirals uniform we have up to speed and then brush my teeth. Then you have 8 hrs of that oh so great hotel quality rest :eek: Once awake, I need at least 45 min to SSS (sh**, shower, and shave). Then another 10 min to get in the monkey suit and pack it all up to show downstairs with a smile and listen to the cat ranchers complain on how they did not get to shop for kitty and then to put up with the old man's BS again. Oh and I still have not had a decent, nutritious meal in the last 24 hrs, so it will be another Cliff Bar for breakfast since we are late for push and hope for a box nasty during the flight.

It's not like that on every trip, but seems to be on the ones when you are getting the shaft IMO.

What a mess. Each side is claiming victory?!?
Glad we came out better than the last three mergers.




PHX Domicile Update

Dear Phoenix Pilots,

It’s been an interesting weekend to be sure. This coming week your Phoenix base representatives will be meeting in DFW on Wednesday to have a joint meeting with both APA & USAPA. After that, the BPR will have its own meeting at the hotel we are staying in on Thursday morning.

As the announcement says, it is likely this BPR meeting will be “closed.” If you care to stop by, we will be at the Arlington Hilton. As details emerge from this meeting, we will share them with you.
As you know, Judge Silver made her ruling this past Friday. You can read the order HERE, or in the Addington II section of the USAPA Legal Library. If you have not read the ruling in its entirety, we strongly urge you to do so.

After we read the ruling, we needed to check our dictionary to fully understand at least one of the descriptive terms used by Judge Silver. Here’s the one we looked up:

Pyrrhic victory – Here it is used in a sentence: “USAPA has succeeded here but it is a Pyrrhic victory.” This is the definition of “pyrrhic victory” from Wikipedia: APyrrhic victory is a victory with such a devastating cost that it is tantamount to defeat. Someone who wins a Pyrrhic victory has been victorious in some way; however, the heavy toll (or cost) negates any sense of achievement or profit.

Judge Silver said the following about Pat Szmanski’s efforts in the court room as well:

Pat Szymanski, counsel for USAPA, was the driving force behind the original provision as well as Paragraph 10(h). (Transcript at 86-88).

Mr. Szymanksi did not sit for a deposition nor did he testify at trial. But inappropriately during the trial, from the well of the courtroom, Mr. Szymanski tried to offer testimony about why USAPA proposed these provisions. The Court refused to allow Mr. Szymanski to offer unsworn statements about his motivations and invited him to take the stand, testify under oath, and be subject to cross-examination. He declined.2
2 Mr. Szymanski’s actions on this point have been troubling. Pursuant to Arizona….. Mr. Szymanski likely should have withdrawn from this case.

Judge Silver said this about USAPA:

The Court’s patience with USAPA has run out. USAPA avoided liability on the DFR claim by the slimmest of margins and the Court has serious doubts that USAPA will fairly and adequately represent all of its members while it remains a certified representative.

Please be assured that your Phoenix representatives are doing everything within their power to protect the seniority rights of the former America West Pilots as delivered in the agreed upon arbitration process that took place over 7 years ago. As Judge Silver said, “During the course of this case, USAPA employed almost every conceivable delaying tactic.” If you’ve been following our saga, you know that to be a very true statement.

John, Roger & Dave