![]() |
|
Happy Father's Day to all the Dads! Hope we all have at least some time to enjoy with the kiddos!:)
|
Originally Posted by hockeypilot44
(Post 1664953)
I didn't want to extend. I told my captain. He said I had no reason not to extend as it was his leg and we were only going over by about 18 minutes (ended up only being :11) so I took the path of least resistance. The release we signed had an earlier departure time. They pushed our time back twice waiting for pax. I signed the release before I knew were going into our extension. I told the captain this is not legal per FARs. He called crew tracking who told him it was. Captain then disagreed with me. I stopped arguing and just flew flight. I feel we have an illegal and broken system. That is why I am posting this. I feel we should have been given a new release. I honestly felt like refusing the extension would have been way more hassle than it was worth. If my own captain is against me, then I figure everyone's against me.
My offense is that you failed to man up and then you come here and whine about it being everyone's else fault. It is your fault. Live with the decisions you make. It is called being professional. |
Originally Posted by Razorback one
(Post 1664970)
The Delta pilot that was working on the project quit. If that tells you anything. I'm going to guess that on Father's Day, 2015 we will either begin the test phase or they will give up.
R1 Sadly, I'm not joking. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by DAWGS
(Post 1664975)
Happy Father's Day to all the Dads! Hope we all have at least some time to enjoy with the kiddos!:)
One of my kids (25yrs. old, still in college on the 8 year plan) called me a few days ago and she said, "Hey dad, can you send me some money so I can buy you something nice for Father's Day?" :rolleyes: At least my dog got me some Sam Adams Rebel IPA! Man's best friend! |
Originally Posted by Razor
(Post 1664960)
I suggest you don't post anymore about it on this public forum and call ALPA tomorrow.
|
Originally Posted by Dash8widget
(Post 1664936)
This bears re-posting
Check, you are not missing anything. The "automatic extension" policy is contrary to the FAA's interpretation of 117. If you sign the release before knowing about an extension, that signature does NOT mean that you approve any subsequent extension - no matter what the company says. You can only approve an extension AFTER you know about it. I believe the company has not made a change in policy because it always made it clear the concurrence could be revoke at any time. In the FAA interpretation the option to revoke was not there. Again however it makes no real difference. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1664574)
I've said it many times before but it seems appropriate to repeat right now ----
It is impossible to understate the ENORMOUS "productivity/efficiency" concession we made in C2012 when we agreed to make July and August into 30 day months. That little gem cost us an untold number of jobs and saved the company mega millions. Sounds like a very precise number. Almost as precise as the 125 jobs that we were specifically told C2012 would cost. At an average of maybe $200K plus benefits, that's probably around $32.5M per year. May one assume that's what you meant by mega? ;) |
On the topic of HP 44's extension, I'm under the impression that the problem in 117 is the the PIC (not the individual pilot) makes the call as to fitness, which leaves the fatigue call as the only "approved" option to refuse the flight.
I don't know if Delta's pre-extension policy is legal, and I strongly object to it, but it was policy, and you can see how it combined with the FAR language to make the crew find that the path to least resistance went through the air. I heard other discussions, where first officers went along with Captains that were only interested in their own fitness. Fortunately, on a day where many of these discussions took place, I was flying with an APC regular, who consulted with me first, and simply called sched to tell them we weren't extending. EOS. Enter the latest LOA... The new language requires concurrence by both pilots to extend. It's more restrictive than 117, and it removes the extra pressure on the FO. So if HP 44's story occurs before the effective date of that change in the LOA, it highlights a benefit gained. If the story takes place afterwards, he needs to study his contract more. |
Here's an idea: When you sign the release, also write at the bottom, "I will NOT extend past..." and enter your own personal drop dead time.
Then send and ACARS msg to the Disp. with the same drop dead time, as you are taxiing around JFK for an hour. You might put in a hotel request too, just to get him to pay attention! |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1664892)
What am I missing here? I thought the FAA said that our automatic extension policy was illegal. Both pilots have to agree to an extension and both pilots have to sign a new release. Look at scenario number two in this letter:
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...rpretation.pdf The document you quote points to the PIC as the person that determines crew fitness, doesn't it? That might be the piece you're not considering. Should be a moot point (not a mute FO) with the latest LOA. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:28 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands