Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
01-18-2014 | 08:35 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,707
Likes: 0
From: Permanently scarred
Sorry for the identical question that Boog asked. I was scrolling on my phone past the new posts and didn't see his post.
01-18-2014 | 08:44 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 2
From: Capt
01-18-2014 | 09:14 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 762
Likes: 0
Is this right with FAR 117? Your first day of reserve the first sign in time is at 1200 base time or a 1000 SC.
01-18-2014 | 09:17 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat over the CONUS
From Council 66
On your first on call day following your last non-fly day, you check your schedule at 0200 base time. After that check, you are then required to acknowledge a trip assignment no less than 3 hours before sign-in (the earliest rotation/SC assignment is 0500 on your first on-call day). Scheduling has assigned you a rotation that reports at 0600. Are you legal?
NO. According to FAR 117, you are not legal because you need at least 10 hours rest before starting a flight duty period. In this scenario, the earliest report for a rotation is 1200 (i.e., you acknowledge assignment at 0200, add 10 hours of rest, which brings you to 1200).
01-18-2014 | 11:19 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,642
Likes: 0
From: right for a long, long time
Example:
On your first on call day following your last non-fly day, you check your schedule at 0200 base time. After that check, you are then required to acknowledge a trip assignment no less than 3 hours before sign-in (the earliest rotation/SC assignment is 0500 on your first on-call day). Scheduling has assigned you a rotation that reports at 0600. Are you legal?
NO. According to FAR 117, you are not legal because you need at least 10 hours rest before starting a flight duty period. In this scenario, the earliest report for a rotation is 1200 (i.e., you acknowledge assignment at 0200, add 10 hours of rest, which brings you to 1200).
On your first on call day following your last non-fly day, you check your schedule at 0200 base time. After that check, you are then required to acknowledge a trip assignment no less than 3 hours before sign-in (the earliest rotation/SC assignment is 0500 on your first on-call day). Scheduling has assigned you a rotation that reports at 0600. Are you legal?
NO. According to FAR 117, you are not legal because you need at least 10 hours rest before starting a flight duty period. In this scenario, the earliest report for a rotation is 1200 (i.e., you acknowledge assignment at 0200, add 10 hours of rest, which brings you to 1200).
Should you choose to exercise your rights under the PWA to its fullest and acknowledge the assignment at say 3:01 prior to report(no less than 3 hours before report), you will be illegal by FAR and yet fully in compliance with the PWA!
It's an interesting scenario....
01-19-2014 | 03:35 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
From: Right Seat 744
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in this case, I think scheduling would drop your resv day with a PD and you wont get paid for that resv day.
01-19-2014 | 04:07 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,876
Likes: 193
01-19-2014 | 04:52 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,299
Likes: 0
01-19-2014 | 05:03 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 922
Likes: 0
From: Decoupled
01-19-2014 | 05:15 AM
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
From: on my way out
The other douchebag finally wrote me back.... just so you know where he stands:
Thank you for contacting me in regard to the proposed Customs and Border Protection (CBP) preclearance facility at AbuDhabi International Airport (AUH). I appreciate hearing from you and would like to take this opportunity to address your concerns. As you may know, in 2013 the Department of Homeland Security proposed a CBP preclearance facility at AUH in order to mitigate security threats by extending our zone of security and in collaboration with international partners, prohibit potential threats before they reach the United States. The U.S. has operated preclearance offices beyond our borders since 1952; today our government operates a total of 15 international facilities. Screening passengers abroad, rather than upon entry into the U.S. reduces the risk of attack by helping to keep dangerous people and goods off aircraft bound for our country.
In addition to keeping our country safe, any preclearance facility should also seek to reduce congestion at major airports in the U.S. and enhance our domestic aviation interests. I strongly support preclearance operations and the benefits they provide to facilitating travel into the U.S. However, the establishment of preclearance operations should not jeopardize jobs in the U.S. or provide a competitive advantage to foreign interests.
Although I am not a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee which allocates funding for CBP preclearance facilities, please know I will keep your concerns in mind should relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me. It is an honor and a privilege to serve the people of Florida in the United States Senate.
Sincerely,
Marco Rubio
United States Senator
Thank you for contacting me in regard to the proposed Customs and Border Protection (CBP) preclearance facility at AbuDhabi International Airport (AUH). I appreciate hearing from you and would like to take this opportunity to address your concerns. As you may know, in 2013 the Department of Homeland Security proposed a CBP preclearance facility at AUH in order to mitigate security threats by extending our zone of security and in collaboration with international partners, prohibit potential threats before they reach the United States. The U.S. has operated preclearance offices beyond our borders since 1952; today our government operates a total of 15 international facilities. Screening passengers abroad, rather than upon entry into the U.S. reduces the risk of attack by helping to keep dangerous people and goods off aircraft bound for our country.
In addition to keeping our country safe, any preclearance facility should also seek to reduce congestion at major airports in the U.S. and enhance our domestic aviation interests. I strongly support preclearance operations and the benefits they provide to facilitating travel into the U.S. However, the establishment of preclearance operations should not jeopardize jobs in the U.S. or provide a competitive advantage to foreign interests.
Although I am not a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee which allocates funding for CBP preclearance facilities, please know I will keep your concerns in mind should relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me. It is an honor and a privilege to serve the people of Florida in the United States Senate.
Sincerely,
Marco Rubio
United States Senator
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
