...go a couple years without balling one up and people forget what we are doing here.

 

It's totally real and that is verbatim what the HI6 says from the CRJ program manager himself. It was sent to all CRJ captains.

 

It’s for real. Talked to a friend of mine, and he got sent to the CPO for adding 500lbs. In the most professional manner he explained why he wanted every pound of fuel. CP was very impressed and wanted the Captain to talk to the dispatchers. (And this guy is a 175 captain)

This should not be an issue! Putting captains on a “list” is despicable.

I added fuel yesterday. Was given 250lbs for taxi, wrong arrival flow into DFW, and last fix on the arrival should be at 11,000 ft, but was filed at FL240. GMAFB.

90% of the time, fuel is not an issue. But when the filed arrival fuel gets low, you start nitpicking the release. And all sorts of things pop up.

 

Yeesh. Before I upgraded for a couple months prior I was asking every captain I flew with if they have had any push back from the CPO in regards to captain add. Every captain I flew with said they never heard anything. But there were all sorts of rumors floating out there and so many stories that it is hard to know what's real without direct first hand experience. I remember when they were dragging all the LCA down to dfw a few years back to discuss a new fuel policy and shortly thereafter basically every release was tight on fuel so more and more captains fought back with adding, and still none of them said they heard anything from the company. So I hope this isn't a new change in the wind. But it wouldn't surprise me if it were. I know other regionals are fueled no where near how well we are. I'm not saying that we're better or not, or that because they get away with it, so we should be able to squeak by on fumes as well, I'm just saying that I know we are one of the more generously fueled regionals and I have always appreciated that. Hope it's not changing.

 

Sadly, it’s 100% real. It was sent by the CRJ Fleet Manager to CRJ guys. You can see a screenshot of the actual HI6 on TalkAirline.

 

The news is always looking for a scary flying story. Since this email has been confirmed please leak it to a freind or family member in the Chicago news business. Ask to remain anonymous. Don’t wait for an accident.

When practical, don’t ask for fuel if it will force you to return to the gate for going below min TO fuel. By asking for fuel you are putting a bandaid on a poorly thought out process. 2 engine taxi with APU on.

 

Sam just sent out a fast read about this.

 

Sam Pool just sent this out:


"April 5, 2018

Fellow Envoy Pilots –

A hot topic of conversation this week has been fuel. AAG wants Envoy to carry and use the minimum. AAG has retained a "Fuel Czar" who monitors fuel usage throughout the system and is shining a bright spotlight on Envoy's fuel use. He wants Envoy to fuel so minimally that diversions and all that go with them – missed connections, timed out crews, hotel stays for passengers, etc. – are virtually assured. As pilots, our mission is to get the planes and passengers where they need to go, safely and on time. Our experience with the weather and ATC systems is supposed to be a part of the fueling equation, and indeed is mandated by the FARs. However, lately management's squeeze for economic perfection has gone over the top in the form of harassment and threatened discipline for pilots who attempt to apply their experience and request additional fuel. This is not acceptable.



This week the CRJ Fleet Manager sent an ill-conceived and poorly worded letter to CRJ pilots that was perceived as threatening pilots for doing the very duty demanded by the FM1 and FARs. This is not the first such email, nor is it the first such threat. While perhaps the most graphic and honest display of management's thinking, the CRJ fleet message is not an anomaly. The scope of the matter is systemic and reaches every level of our operation.



Pilots should know that the dispatchers are feeling similar pressure, and their supervisors are demanding accountability for every pound of fuel that exceeds the bare minimum. Dispatchers aren't fueling you to the minimum for amusement, they're doing it because the Sword of the Fuel Czar is over their heads too. The pressure for economy is setting up a pilot-versus-dispatcher and pilot-versus-Flight Department dynamic that should not exist.



The FM1 is an FAA-approved document, and provides fueling guidelines for many scenarios, including weather and turbulence. Over the past few months, pilots have attempted to work with dispatchers to obtain additional fuel for weather, turbulence or ATC per the FM1, only to be told that the flights will not be given additional fuel except via CAPT ADD. This is troubling for two reasons: the FAA-approved FM1 is not automatically being followed, and our Captains are now 'on the radar' for taking CAPT ADD fuel.



There is another point of consternation from the Company: pilots who request contingency fuel for a given scenario and then don't use it. The Flight Department has recently called pilots onto the carpet if they request additional fuel for weather or ATC and then don't use it. The message is clear: don't ask for insurance unless you're guaranteed to use it. This is beyond unacceptable.



In the coming days and weeks your ALPA team will interface with Company personnel to more clearly identify expectations and shortcomings, and seek resolution to the challenges detailed above. We will be transmitting additional emails on the subject of fuel that we hope are educational and helpful. In the meantime, here are some basic guidelines:



· The FARs and FM1 are clear, the pilot in command and the dispatcher MUST AGREE on the Dispatch Release/Flight Plan, including the amount of fuel for a given flight. If you do not agree with what the dispatcher has planned, have a courteous and professional conversation as to what you believe is necessary. Calls are recorded and calm, reasonable professionals always sound better.



· Do not accept a fuel plan that you are not comfortable with under any circumstances. The PIC and Dispatcher MUST agree. If you don't agree, don't accept it. Take the necessary time to produce a fuel plan with which you are comfortable. Do not be pressured or rushed.



· If you have to argue for fuel, or if fuel is originally planned in a manner inconsistent with FM1, consider filing an ASAP. Write down as many details as possible. Save your original release and any subsequently modified release(s). Utilize ALPA resources before filing the ASAP. Do not file an ASAP if you are unhappy with the fuel but decide to accept the release anyway.



· If you are called on the carpet for fuel considerations, consider filing an ASAP. Again, record as many details as possible and utilize ALPA resources before filing the ASAP.



We want Envoy to be a safe, efficient, on-time machine for AA. However, we are mandated by the FM1 and FARs to be the last line of defense against the corporation's natural tendency to do the bare minimum. Do not take your role lightly.



Be smart. Be reasonable. Be the final authority as to the acceptance of the flight/fuel plan. All of ALPA is aligned behind you.



In Unity,


Sam Pool
MEC Chairman"

 

My question is, why isn't ALPA "talking" to the FAA instead of the company?

 

I wonder the same thing. This isn't a topic to negotiate with management. This is a safety issue that the FAA needs to crack down on. This isn't the first time something this egregious has happened here. That CRJ manager needs to be fired.