Originally Posted by ghilis101 (Post 2106277)

United's new contract pays a pretty hefty premium for an FDP extension. I do not support this idea because pilots will see the money and extend when they are actually fatigued. This is a great discussion because a lot of times we are faced with having to cut off our own pay. Case in point, I did not accept an extension causing me to miss my greenslip the next day. I lost out on the pay, but I made the safe call by not endangering the crew or passengers, and I lived to fly another day. Its up to each pilot to assess their fitness for duty and if you feel like the company needs you, dont fret. They can ALWAYS find another crew to fly the airplane. Theyre very good at this.

Originally Posted by ghilis101 (Post 2106277)

United's new contract pays a pretty hefty premium for an FDP extension. I do not support this idea because pilots will see the money and extend when they are actually fatigued. This is a great discussion because a lot of times we are faced with having to cut off our own pay. Case in point, I did not accept an extension causing me to miss my greenslip the next day. I lost out on the pay, but I made the safe call by not endangering the crew or passengers, and I lived to fly another day. Its up to each pilot to assess their fitness for duty and if you feel like the company needs you, dont fret. They can ALWAYS find another crew to fly the airplane. Theyre very good at this.

Originally Posted by GogglesPisano (Post 2105814)

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...rpretation.pdf

Explain to me again how our current procedure is kosher?

Scenario 2:
Your second scenario is as follows. Immediately prior to the beginning of the final scheduled flight segment, the pilot-in-command (PIC) realizes that he will be unable to complete that segment without a 2-hour FDP extension. You ask two questions about this scenario.
Q1: Does the fitness-for-duty affirmation that the PIC signed prior to when he found out about the delay serve as concurrence to an extension?
Subsection 117.l9(a) allows an FDP to be extended up to 2 hours beyond the pertinent FDP limit in response to unforeseen operational circumstances that arise prior to takeoff. This extension is subject to a number of limitations, one of which is that the PIC and the
certificate holder must both concur with the extension.' A document that the PIC signed before he found out about the need for an extension would not be sufficient to concur with the extension because a person cannot concur with something that he or she does not know about. Instead, the PIC must affirmatively concur with the extension.
Q2: For this question, you ask us to assume that the length of the extension in the above scenario is 30 minutes instead of two hours. You ask us whether this changes our analysis in the previous question.
In a recently-issued interpretation the FAA stated that all FDP extensions taken pursuant to § 117.19 require PIC concurrence.4 However, the FAA noted that PIC concurrence
with extensions of30 minutes or less can be accomplished via a fitness-for-duty affirmation. 5
In this case, however, even though the extension would only be 30 minutes, the PIC's
fitness for duty affirmation would be insufficient to concur with the extension because
the affirmation took place before the PIC found out about the need for an extension. This
is because the PIC cannot concur with something that he does not know about. Thus,
even though the PIC's concurrence with extensions of30 minutes or less can be done via
a fitness-for-duty affirmation, an affirmation that takes place prior to when the PIC finds
out about the need for an extension would not be sufficient as a concurrence."

Originally Posted by capncrunch (Post 2106305)

The extension should cost the company and I'd rather get paid for it.

Originally Posted by hookshot123 (Post 2106359)

I understand the sentiment that it should cost the company. But to me this is like paying out unused sick leave. It gives a financial incentive to pilots to fly when they should not.

JMHO,
Capt. Hook

Originally Posted by Falcon20 (Post 2107185)

So I was rerouted into an X day. I was able to deviate to still make it home the same day. I called crew schedules and they put a PB day on my schedule. But my time card says only 2:40 for reroute pay. Is that correct? I read the PWA and I thought it should be a full day's pay of 5:15.

Thanks

Originally Posted by capncrunch (Post 2106374)

I don't see it that way, I just see us not getting paid when we get screwed.

I also don't get that argument for not improving sick leave.

Have some faith in your fellow pilots and lets fight to improve the contract.

Originally Posted by tomgoodman (Post 2107411)

If we want the company to pay for unused sick time and a premium for duty extensions, but don't want pilots tempted to fly sick or fatigued, how about directing the payments to the union's strike fund or mutual aid fund?

Originally Posted by nohat (Post 2107950)

we no longer have any work rules worth anything. our future contract offer does not improve our QOL that much either.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 2108648)

This is true. We are expected to be ready to fly to FAR max everytime we go to work. Anyone who refuses an extension knows that the chief pilot who follows up will tell you that refusing an extension is against the norm.

Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 2108657)

Who cares? Do what you need to do.

Originally Posted by hockeypilot44 (Post 2108648)

This is true. We are expected to be ready to fly to FAR max everytime we go to work. Anyone who refuses an extension knows that the chief pilot who follows up will tell you that refusing an extension is against the norm.

Originally Posted by The Cavalier (Post 2108713)

So? If you can't go you can't go. It's our job to make that call. It's like growing a pair and calling in sick when you are too sick to fly. Are we really that worried about a phone call? Is it right? No but the possibility of getting a call is not impacting my decision.

I flew with a Capt that refused an extension, we were on different rotations so it wasn't an issue for me. Replacement was found and we continued on. I flew with the same Capt a few months later and the only CPO call he got was one apologizing for not being able to give him reroute pay for the additional overnight. I question whether or not the intimation calls are as rampant as the Internet would lead me to believe.

Originally Posted by Moondog (Post 2104559)

I had a 4F1R once and couldn't find what the R meant. I found it in my PAS statement for the month and the R meant the rotation was removed for company connivence or some such wording, not reroute.

Originally Posted by queuetip (Post 2113346)

Learned something interesting the hard way about reroutes. If the reroute is the result of something beyond the company's control, the pilot is only entitled to straight pay and credit (23L8) for any additional time on duty. Important to note that if it extends to another duty period, said pilot is only guaranteed duty period minimum if the trip's average day is still 5.15.