Change My View - Part 117
01-18-2020, 09:27 AM
#121
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
Originally Posted by BlueMoon
Commuting isn't duty.
Commuting isn't scheduled by the company.
117 governors what the company can schedule, it in no way limits your ability to commute in one minute before show and operate, if you chose too.
Using your logic, if you lived in MEM you would have to drive into work and get a sleep room and have two hours rest before show time.
Commuting isn't scheduled by the company.
117 governors what the company can schedule, it in no way limits your ability to commute in one minute before show and operate, if you chose too.
Using your logic, if you lived in MEM you would have to drive into work and get a sleep room and have two hours rest before show time.
01-18-2020, 09:28 AM
#122
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
No Tuck it has been answered per the links I have posted. Commuting isn't duty period. You are once again stating inaccuracies and muddying the conversation with falsehoods.
You can commute inn and land 1 hour prior to show under 117 without a “2 hour rest opportunity”.
You can commute inn and land 1 hour prior to show under 117 without a “2 hour rest opportunity”.
so how about “scheduled rest cannot be reduced” part?
01-18-2020, 11:43 AM
#123
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by Tuck
i think that makes sense - so won’t affect jumpseating.
so how about “scheduled rest cannot be reduced” part?
so how about “scheduled rest cannot be reduced” part?
The more you understand 117 the more you will see our current CBA is fairly close on “scheduled” regs. It will start to become obvious the company is spreading fear because they dont want to give up the “operational” abuse they currently use.
01-18-2020, 12:31 PM
#124
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Change My View - Part 117
Originally Posted by MEMFO4Ever
WOCL, AMOC, FRMP, FDP?
Not sure what any of this is. I am acronym'd out. The only constant I know is that when I hub turn in the middle of the night I am tired. I have always been tired/exhausted and will continue to be tired/exhausted. Averaging maybe 4 hours of sleep every day, split between the hotel and lounger/sleep room is about all I am going to get anyway. C'est la vie. Making me do that 3 or 4 times a month, if that's what Part 117 does, instead of twice a month is not going to improve anything particularly with the stress added by even more commuting. Doubt Part 117 will make me feel any better since most of our trips/lines meet those requirements anyway according to the union. The only thing that will fix chronic tiredness is to stop flying in the middle of the night; ie. retirement or death.
Not sure what any of this is. I am acronym'd out. The only constant I know is that when I hub turn in the middle of the night I am tired. I have always been tired/exhausted and will continue to be tired/exhausted. Averaging maybe 4 hours of sleep every day, split between the hotel and lounger/sleep room is about all I am going to get anyway. C'est la vie. Making me do that 3 or 4 times a month, if that's what Part 117 does, instead of twice a month is not going to improve anything particularly with the stress added by even more commuting. Doubt Part 117 will make me feel any better since most of our trips/lines meet those requirements anyway according to the union. The only thing that will fix chronic tiredness is to stop flying in the middle of the night; ie. retirement or death.
That’s the discussion. Some say it will increase commuting. I say, it doesn’t have to. Management builds the pairings and ALPA builds the lines. There is no reason to believe that ALPA will not try to build lines the same way they do today.
Originally Posted by BEEF1
This is my first post. Actually I registered just to respond to this.
Some things to think about..
This effects more than just hub turns and operational emergencies.
Everyone of us needs to do the research. Read the actual regs and think about how it applies to YOU. A quick google search will lead you to some pretty user friendly reference charts put together by our passenger carrying brethren.
A few things I noticed..
-100/28. Instead of 100/month you are now restricted to 100/28 days. This could be an issue for the international types trying to grab open time trips. You may find yourself unable to do something you want because it’s now illegal.
-56 hours rest after a trip that crosses 60 degrees. Again, if you’re the type that likes to hustle your schedule, this is something that could become a roadblock between you and your paycheck/lifestyle you want.
-10 hours of rest. For all of you deviators out there this means you need to be in position 2 hours earlier. Not a huge amount of time, but it’s easy to imagine how this can translate to less time at home and a degradation of your quality of life.
-60/168. 60 hours duty in a rolling 7 day period. Most of the time I’m sure it’s not an issue, but it’s not hard to think of a situation where can bite you.
-9 hour duty limitation for late night operations. For the most part this won’t effect us during normal operations. We have a number of AM out and backs that are awful close to that 9 hour duty and doesn’t leave much room for delays. These could get converted to turns. I personally know a lot of guys that like the AM out and back. This could mean fewer of those.
On a positive note though, this could mean adding a 3rd crew member to the dreaded MEM-ANC death march.
I’m sure there’s more, but these are some that jump out at me. Take a look for yourself and make your own interpretations.
Another thing to note..
117 came about in 2012. How many have we hired since 2012? Close to half of our pilot group I imagine.
They made a conscious decision to come to Fedex. Many came from 117 airlines.
Most of the new hires I talk to made the decision to come here because of our work rules and contract. We fly fewer hours than all of our 121 counterparts. They all have the internet and are capable of doing the research. They knew what they were getting into and they decided that FedEx was best for them and their family. They CHOSE to avoid a company with 117 regulations.
You are ALPA. Write your block reps and let them know how you feel (either way). Be smart. Avoid the slogans.
Some things to think about..
This effects more than just hub turns and operational emergencies.
Everyone of us needs to do the research. Read the actual regs and think about how it applies to YOU. A quick google search will lead you to some pretty user friendly reference charts put together by our passenger carrying brethren.
A few things I noticed..
-100/28. Instead of 100/month you are now restricted to 100/28 days. This could be an issue for the international types trying to grab open time trips. You may find yourself unable to do something you want because it’s now illegal.
-56 hours rest after a trip that crosses 60 degrees. Again, if you’re the type that likes to hustle your schedule, this is something that could become a roadblock between you and your paycheck/lifestyle you want.
-10 hours of rest. For all of you deviators out there this means you need to be in position 2 hours earlier. Not a huge amount of time, but it’s easy to imagine how this can translate to less time at home and a degradation of your quality of life.
-60/168. 60 hours duty in a rolling 7 day period. Most of the time I’m sure it’s not an issue, but it’s not hard to think of a situation where can bite you.
-9 hour duty limitation for late night operations. For the most part this won’t effect us during normal operations. We have a number of AM out and backs that are awful close to that 9 hour duty and doesn’t leave much room for delays. These could get converted to turns. I personally know a lot of guys that like the AM out and back. This could mean fewer of those.
On a positive note though, this could mean adding a 3rd crew member to the dreaded MEM-ANC death march.
I’m sure there’s more, but these are some that jump out at me. Take a look for yourself and make your own interpretations.
Another thing to note..
117 came about in 2012. How many have we hired since 2012? Close to half of our pilot group I imagine.
They made a conscious decision to come to Fedex. Many came from 117 airlines.
Most of the new hires I talk to made the decision to come here because of our work rules and contract. We fly fewer hours than all of our 121 counterparts. They all have the internet and are capable of doing the research. They knew what they were getting into and they decided that FedEx was best for them and their family. They CHOSE to avoid a company with 117 regulations.
You are ALPA. Write your block reps and let them know how you feel (either way). Be smart. Avoid the slogans.
Just as a disclaimer, I’m one of those that came here DESPITE it not being 117. And I came here wanting to change it. And now that I’m here, just like everyone else here, I’d like to see other changes that we feel would be better. Also, many, if not most, are here because it was the first major to offer them a job.
As for all the points you made, the regulation was written that way in order to prevent fatigue to begin with. That was the point of 117, to prevent the possibility of fatigue.
Originally Posted by Nightflyer
We used to have lots of weekend layovers. Now there are significantly fewer of them. Do you think the company wants to pay you to sit in a hotel room all weekend? They may do this for the cities that still have WE layovers, but they won't add new ones. You will work Wed, Thur, Fri, then deadhead home Saturday morning, then deadhead back out Sunday afternoon, then work Mon and Tues. Do you really want to do that? I don't.
ALPA national works in the best interest of ALPA national. ALPA national is controlled by the pax majority. Do you really think they are working for the FedEx pilots benefit? I don't trust them to do the right thing for me, when the pax guys are calling the shots. Yes, I know the president is one of us, er, or used to be, since he "retired" (when he said he wouldn't). So, no, I don't trust him either. He has proven his word is no good by retiring when he said he would not.
I believe the company is right on this one. Yes, they are against it because they must think it all cost them more money. But that is not what I am worried about. I think they are correct that it will devastate our historical week on week off schedules, and that is more important to our quality of life than hiring a few more pilots so ALPA can collect more dues.
Night hub turners beware, if this passes, I believe your quality of life will go down significantly.
ALPA national works in the best interest of ALPA national. ALPA national is controlled by the pax majority. Do you really think they are working for the FedEx pilots benefit? I don't trust them to do the right thing for me, when the pax guys are calling the shots. Yes, I know the president is one of us, er, or used to be, since he "retired" (when he said he wouldn't). So, no, I don't trust him either. He has proven his word is no good by retiring when he said he would not.
I believe the company is right on this one. Yes, they are against it because they must think it all cost them more money. But that is not what I am worried about. I think they are correct that it will devastate our historical week on week off schedules, and that is more important to our quality of life than hiring a few more pilots so ALPA can collect more dues.
Night hub turners beware, if this passes, I believe your quality of life will go down significantly.
Deadhead home and then back the next day? That would be two separate trips. Those already exist. ALPA builds them into separate lines.
ALPA National was pretty silent on this for years, until a FedEx pilot became president. That is not a coincidence. He just recently sent out an email referencing the article on Pfc.
As much as I’m for 117, this is actually more about One Level of Safety for ALPA. A much larger picture that deals with flight deck safety, single pilot ops, etc. As for management, I honestly think they fear the ability to extend our duty day would go away more than anything else. Sure, they want to keep the night hub turn schedules as is, but it wouldn’t take much tweaking to make it work.
Originally Posted by Nightflyer
There are traditionally more weekend layovers in the winter than in the summer, due to poor reliability of winter pax flights. Look at the July schedule, and you will see fewer weekend layovers. The company only pays us to sit on the weekends when it is to their advantage, not to make our schedules more livable.
If this passes, time will tell if I am correct or not. But by then it will be too late. You are correct, I don't have a crystal ball to know what is going to happen. I do know this, the company will do what is best for them, not for you. If that means you work 3 days on, 4 days off, they will do it. Yes, I know the sig has an input, but the company builds the pairings, and then the sig has to put them together. You have seen the trash lines at the bottom of the bid pack, haven't you? If the sig was the solution, all line would be commutable. They are not because of the way the pairings are built. What if the majority of the bid pack was composed of trash lines that are uncommutable? Seniority is important here, more important than other places, I have been told. If there are more lines requiring multiple commutes to Memphis, junior folks will have to either live in MEM or suffer the change in their lifestyle. This doesn't bother me, as I am more senior than most of the talking heads on this board, but be careful what you wish for.
"Our" union lied to us during the last contract negotiations. They refused to let alternative views of contract language to be aired and discussed with the crew force. Those "alternative" views turned out to be correct, and the crew force is suffering because the union was and probably still is, incompetent. Why should I trust them any more than I trust the company? They have a proven record of lying to us. The question you need to answer is, are they lying to us again this time? I don't know the answer, and neither do you. But by the time both of us know, it will be too late to change it if they are.
All I am saying is, be careful what you wish for, you may get it, in spades.
This reminds me of "if you want to know what is in the bill, we need to pass it". How did that turn out for us?
Yes, you are correct, “the company will do what is best for them.” And that means being against 117 to them.
The bottom lines are always going to be trash because no matter how many trips you have, at some point during the line building process, you run out of trips to string them together in a cohesive manner. This would be true with 100 trips or one million trips, the bottom 5% of lines will always be a patchwork of trips.
I’m junior here and not only have read the bill, but worked under it. And I say, bring it on because I believe that on balance, it would be good.
Originally Posted by threeighteen
This goes back to what I said earlier, take the good aspects of 117, work them into the contract, leave the rest behind. A blanket adoption of 117 might be good for pilots at struggling cargo carriers but it is a negative for FedEx pilots.
If I had to pick only one aspect of 117 to put on our contract, it would be the FDP duty limits and extension limits. Do you believe management would allow that to be negotiated into our contract? I don’t! Having this regulation will prevent us from having to use negotiating capital that we can use for other things. Not to mention that we shouldn’t ever have to negotiate for safety items.
Originally Posted by ColCargill
I think the above sums up the entire situation.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. We will never know what FedEx will do if 117 is forced on us (neither do they). We cannot know what the FAA will grant exemptions to. If we what more rest (science-based or not), we should bargain for it and be willing to give up pay to get it. If 117 makes you less productive then Fred is going to pay you less. If you are not less productive, be prepared to lose flexibility and have fewer long blocks of days off.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. We will never know what FedEx will do if 117 is forced on us (neither do they). We cannot know what the FAA will grant exemptions to. If we what more rest (science-based or not), we should bargain for it and be willing to give up pay to get it. If 117 makes you less productive then Fred is going to pay you less. If you are not less productive, be prepared to lose flexibility and have fewer long blocks of days off.
Fred has to compete with other airlines for pilots. He won’t be able to get away with paying us any less than he does now.
As for losing long blocks of days off, etc. I thought you said we don’t know what fedex would do? Keep in mind that ALPA is the ones who build the lines.
Originally Posted by threeighteen
Even if we completely ignore the fact that 117 has mostly resulted in a pay-cut for pilots of all airlines that are obligated to follow it, there are still the issues of it completely destroying schedule flexibility as well. Want to trade that single-departure round-the-world 777 trip at the end of February for one at the beginning of February so you can have the last part of Feb off with the first part of March off too? With 117, you can't do that, your max block time in 28 days will be exceeded due to the similar trip you have that ends January 26. You'll only be able to move a trip forward/backward by a few days instead of by a week or two.
Take the few good aspects of 117 (mostly 10hr rest) and work them into your contract (if they aren't already there). Leave the rest of the garbage in 117 for the pax carrying dudes.
117 almost requires PBS to make it work and that means you might not get a trip you want because of 117 limitations that you could hold with line bidding and no 117. If you do 117 and line bidding, you need to make sure your contract language is up to snuff (ala SWA or Spirit pre-PBS), because there's a lot of ways that it will affect your pay/QOL in a negative way if it's not on-point.
Take the few good aspects of 117 (mostly 10hr rest) and work them into your contract (if they aren't already there). Leave the rest of the garbage in 117 for the pax carrying dudes.
117 almost requires PBS to make it work and that means you might not get a trip you want because of 117 limitations that you could hold with line bidding and no 117. If you do 117 and line bidding, you need to make sure your contract language is up to snuff (ala SWA or Spirit pre-PBS), because there's a lot of ways that it will affect your pay/QOL in a negative way if it's not on-point.
My previous experience at a 117 airline was no loss in pay. And this was an airline that had no PBS. There was no issues building lines. It’s still software that is used to build lines taking into consideration whatever parameters you ask it to take into account (117 v 121 restrictions). It actually takes more consideration bargaining PBS in order to take into account the FARs you fly under. Honestly though, I wasn’t ever trying to max out my pay. I suspect that those who did lose pay were the ones who were flying/crediting 85+ hours per month.
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
Schedule manipulation options are simply different in many situation when you compare FedEx to pax. Those guys don't fly trips that turn into another trip within hours - i.e. a series of single trip, 6 CH hub turns back to back over the course of a week. If there are turn restrictions due to the WOCL requirements, one of our pilots isn't going to be able to pick up or trip trade into another hub turn if it doesn't match up properly with the last leg of his inbound trip and provide the required 2 hours of rest. So, he attempts to trade and create a 1:50 rest opportunity (which is perfectly legal now) and can't because science based rules have decided it has to be 2 hours.
What about the many week long hub turn pairings built from out stations? Not a series of one day hub-turns, but the ones that look like a single blue line from say, Monday to Friday or Saturday.
What happens when irregular ops shortens one of those 2 hours of required rest to an illegal amount mid-trip?
Do the schedulers revise the trip (departure time, swap to another outbound flight) or just take the normal, easy solution and put a legal reserve or airport standby pilot on the balance of the trip?
Maybe not a big issue for our pax brethren, since most of them just get pay protected for trip removal. I doubt most of our pilots are going to be very interested in being put into SUB on their week-on/week-off double-deadhead trip because their rest opportunity has been shortened by 15 minutes and is now illegal thanks to an arrival delay.
What’s the solution to minimize this? Just accept that more pilots on average will be in SUB? Build some extra slop into the turn and extend the overall duty period (in addition to the first extension to accommodate 117 in the first place)? Maybe that’ll make the ones who can sleep on the turn happy. For those of us who would rather have a min time turn and get to the hotel ASAP get a double-whammy. A longer turn to accommodate mandatory sleep we won’t get and a shorter layover once we do block in. But it’s science based, right?
What about the many week long hub turn pairings built from out stations? Not a series of one day hub-turns, but the ones that look like a single blue line from say, Monday to Friday or Saturday.
What happens when irregular ops shortens one of those 2 hours of required rest to an illegal amount mid-trip?
Do the schedulers revise the trip (departure time, swap to another outbound flight) or just take the normal, easy solution and put a legal reserve or airport standby pilot on the balance of the trip?
Maybe not a big issue for our pax brethren, since most of them just get pay protected for trip removal. I doubt most of our pilots are going to be very interested in being put into SUB on their week-on/week-off double-deadhead trip because their rest opportunity has been shortened by 15 minutes and is now illegal thanks to an arrival delay.
What’s the solution to minimize this? Just accept that more pilots on average will be in SUB? Build some extra slop into the turn and extend the overall duty period (in addition to the first extension to accommodate 117 in the first place)? Maybe that’ll make the ones who can sleep on the turn happy. For those of us who would rather have a min time turn and get to the hotel ASAP get a double-whammy. A longer turn to accommodate mandatory sleep we won’t get and a shorter layover once we do block in. But it’s science based, right?
A pilot not being able to pick up a trip that only gives him 1:50 rest is the whole point of the reg. It’s to prevent you from being fatigued to begin with.
As for what happens if someone doesn’t get their required rest, scheduling will decide what to do just as they do today when someone doesn’t get their legal rest. And yes, they will build night hub turns with a buffer. From what I’ve heard, the average buffer used is 20 minutes. In my experience, they started with a higher buffer and with time and experience, they keep lowering it to where they feel the trade off is worth it. Just like our fuel sense.
Everything else is contractual and worth looking to change. Things like sub and no pay protection DEFINITELY need to be changed regardless of 117 anyway!
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
Finally, you've got to be joking if you think 7 years of pax ops under 117 is going to give us any realistic information about the implementation of that reg into the current 121 cargo system form at FedEx. Please just stop with the 39 minutes, 10 hours behind the door and not going to 16 hours BS. None of that is worth the unintended consequences on our overall bid packs, commutes, pay, etc.
All I'm advocating is that we don't just assume 117 is an actual safety improvement without some critical analysis. We don't fly like pax guys and whatever it did for them isn't necessarily going to happen here. If it results in a significant degradation to our schedules and QOL just to address the "one-off" irregular ops scenario that happens in the single digit percentages of our flying, are we really making the best decision?
Seven years of passenger operations under 117 will give us more insight into how it might work here than zero years of passenger operations under that reg. Completely ignoring that information is foolish.
If you read the NPRM, in it you will see that it says that most humans are human
and therefore fatigue physiologically affects most humans the same way. It further says that some people are different but that the regulation was written for the majority of humans, not ones like you. Not giving any credence to the science by taking a position that it isn’t science is just weird.But I whole heartedly agree that we should see the data on what how many trips/lines would have to change. And all possible ramifications of it taking into consideration that naturally, management will do what keeps costs lowest.
Originally Posted by Tuck
Oh also less jumpseats available as there will be more commuting - so those DEN jumpseats that fill up exactly 3 weeks out will even be harder to get.
Let's not forget that the entire fatigue mitigation thing is not real sincere. It is still completely legal by the FARs and 117 (although not smart) for you to jumpseat in a cockpit seat for 7 hours and then immediately turn to a 12 hour international duty period. The FAA didn't want to change the real problems as it would cause to much pain for various groups.
Let's not forget that the entire fatigue mitigation thing is not real sincere. It is still completely legal by the FARs and 117 (although not smart) for you to jumpseat in a cockpit seat for 7 hours and then immediately turn to a 12 hour international duty period. The FAA didn't want to change the real problems as it would cause to much pain for various groups.
Part 117 put the onus on the pilot to be fit for duty at the beginning of your FDP. And it actually requires you to certify before each flight. That is a change from 121.
As for the number of jumpseats, you are making the assumption that commuting will increase. Even if I take your position at 100% that it will create more departures, anyone can also make the assumption that that will make more pilots move to Memphis and this reduce commuting overall.
Originally Posted by Tuck
There are a lot of considerations here that should be factored in. Frankly it may be too late but it adds to the understanding.
1. SIG reviews of the percentage that are legal are several years old - at least 4 - not a single recent bid pack has been looked at yet.
2. Flexibility will decrease - the 56 hours in domicile following most intl trips was mentioned before ANY follow on duty - that's anything - training after a BEDH, a single day of ASBY - anything. Ability to swap trips if you're on a greater than 3 night WOCL line will be greatly reduced. Expect more revisions for everyone - one of the biggest complaints guys have now - expect more.
3. I'm all for reducing duty time extensions but I would like to see some data on how often guys get extended to limits. Anyone have any? I've asked but received no answers.
4. Here's a big one - many night hub turn weeks start with a Jumpseat into base - that first night is still a WOCL incursion and you must have 2 hours of uninterrupted rest prior to that first event. So currently you jumpseat in with say 2 hours between landing an show time? Won't be enough - you'll likely have to land 2:30 prior and have a sleep room available - will the company make more sleep rooms available to jumpseaters? What's their incentive when they can just require you come in on the afternoon flight and sleep on your own.
5. AMOCs - Company can apply for any AMOC they want - so we like the limits on duty extensions, nothing stopping them from applying for an AMOC with the argument that the current FRMS is good enough.
Of course the Company doesn't care about us and they are going to do what's best for them. But don't think that this is some obvious win. It could in fact be safer (the entire science idea is a bit squishy though - ask your rep about that when you get a chance) but may end up forcing you to work more days for the same pay and decrease flexibility in how you work. Would that be a win for pilots? I think the most likely thing, without early AMOCs benefiting the Company, is that you would never see any more than a 3 night WOCL incursion - if weekend layovers or 36 hours off in between, or the notorious flip flops work, then those are possible too but protecting the freight will always be their number one goal.
So right now a lot of the well rested part is on you - commuting in, deviating with enough rest, resting during a hub turn or not, getting ready for your week of hub turns in advance, etc - now it will be hard scheduled with no ability to waive the requirements. I'm not advocating either way but the idea from a few guys that this is some sort of obvious win for the pilots is short sighted and not effectively researched.
1. SIG reviews of the percentage that are legal are several years old - at least 4 - not a single recent bid pack has been looked at yet.
2. Flexibility will decrease - the 56 hours in domicile following most intl trips was mentioned before ANY follow on duty - that's anything - training after a BEDH, a single day of ASBY - anything. Ability to swap trips if you're on a greater than 3 night WOCL line will be greatly reduced. Expect more revisions for everyone - one of the biggest complaints guys have now - expect more.
3. I'm all for reducing duty time extensions but I would like to see some data on how often guys get extended to limits. Anyone have any? I've asked but received no answers.
4. Here's a big one - many night hub turn weeks start with a Jumpseat into base - that first night is still a WOCL incursion and you must have 2 hours of uninterrupted rest prior to that first event. So currently you jumpseat in with say 2 hours between landing an show time? Won't be enough - you'll likely have to land 2:30 prior and have a sleep room available - will the company make more sleep rooms available to jumpseaters? What's their incentive when they can just require you come in on the afternoon flight and sleep on your own.
5. AMOCs - Company can apply for any AMOC they want - so we like the limits on duty extensions, nothing stopping them from applying for an AMOC with the argument that the current FRMS is good enough.
Of course the Company doesn't care about us and they are going to do what's best for them. But don't think that this is some obvious win. It could in fact be safer (the entire science idea is a bit squishy though - ask your rep about that when you get a chance) but may end up forcing you to work more days for the same pay and decrease flexibility in how you work. Would that be a win for pilots? I think the most likely thing, without early AMOCs benefiting the Company, is that you would never see any more than a 3 night WOCL incursion - if weekend layovers or 36 hours off in between, or the notorious flip flops work, then those are possible too but protecting the freight will always be their number one goal.
So right now a lot of the well rested part is on you - commuting in, deviating with enough rest, resting during a hub turn or not, getting ready for your week of hub turns in advance, etc - now it will be hard scheduled with no ability to waive the requirements. I'm not advocating either way but the idea from a few guys that this is some sort of obvious win for the pilots is short sighted and not effectively researched.
2. Follow on duty that doesn’t include flying, does not infringe on your FDP. Notably, part 91 flying is included in your FDP and block time limit as that is actual flying. Right now, part 91 flying is treated as non-flying follow on duty and isn’t even part of the 16 hour FAR duty limit!
3. That’s a good question. The only time it’s happened to me, was with one of those part 91 legs (maintenance reposition flight) that I called in fatigue and wasn’t backed up by the captain. That was after about 11 hours of duty, so not even close to the limit, although there wasn’t a legal limit for that flight. This whole calling fatigue thing is a human factors issue to begin with.
4. Been answered already
5. An AMOC has to show at least the same level of safety. So not sure how much they can get away with by being able to extend FDPs.
I don’t see this as an obvious win. I think it’s obvious that some things would be worse and others better. I see it as an overall benefit, especially when you consider this as an argument for One Level of Safety.
01-18-2020, 05:56 PM
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2018
Posts: 210
It’s been said already and bears repeating. Our ability to manipulate schedules and string together a week of flying for those who get a shot gun schedule like you get with our trash like or the substandard line generator will absolutely be reduced. The SIG will build what lines they can to be commutable but this will be more difficult. Our schedule flexibility is by far the best part of working here. Let’s not screw that up.
Is anybody who got hired at FedEx surprised that we fly at night? If you are....well get senior when you can and fly days. If you upgrade at 100% expect some night flying and hub turns on most fleets. It’s not that bad. If you’re new and hate nights, wait and it eventually gets better or put your apps in somewhere else and have all the 117 you can handle.
For everybody who says that at their previous airline blah blah blah. That’s great but was your previous airline a cargo airline operating under part 117....nope that clearly doesn’t exist so is it really a valid comparison?
Is anybody who got hired at FedEx surprised that we fly at night? If you are....well get senior when you can and fly days. If you upgrade at 100% expect some night flying and hub turns on most fleets. It’s not that bad. If you’re new and hate nights, wait and it eventually gets better or put your apps in somewhere else and have all the 117 you can handle.
For everybody who says that at their previous airline blah blah blah. That’s great but was your previous airline a cargo airline operating under part 117....nope that clearly doesn’t exist so is it really a valid comparison?
01-18-2020, 08:39 PM
#126
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
Originally Posted by BLOB
It’s been said already and bears repeating. Our ability to manipulate schedules and string together a week of flying for those who get a shot gun schedule like you get with our trash like or the substandard line generator will absolutely be reduced. The SIG will build what lines they can to be commutable but this will be more difficult. Our schedule flexibility is by far the best part of working here. Let’s not screw that up.
Is anybody who got hired at FedEx surprised that we fly at night? If you are....well get senior when you can and fly days. If you upgrade at 100% expect some night flying and hub turns on most fleets. It’s not that bad. If you’re new and hate nights, wait and it eventually gets better or put your apps in somewhere else and have all the 117 you can handle.
For everybody who says that at their previous airline blah blah blah. That’s great but was your previous airline a cargo airline operating under part 117....nope that clearly doesn’t exist so is it really a valid comparison?
Is anybody who got hired at FedEx surprised that we fly at night? If you are....well get senior when you can and fly days. If you upgrade at 100% expect some night flying and hub turns on most fleets. It’s not that bad. If you’re new and hate nights, wait and it eventually gets better or put your apps in somewhere else and have all the 117 you can handle.
For everybody who says that at their previous airline blah blah blah. That’s great but was your previous airline a cargo airline operating under part 117....nope that clearly doesn’t exist so is it really a valid comparison?
Every airline has shotgun Jr schedules. Thats called making the best of whats left at the end of a bid run. All those Jr guys operating under 117 at SWA, DL, UA, etc find a way to swap, drop, add and correct their lines. Why cant we with these rules?
Everyone understands we fly night hub turns when we are Jr. Why not do it safer if possible? If you want carved out then be ready to be carved out on everything because thats what they (company) will do and its going other places if you continue this attitude.
Its your career on the line being ok with being treated different on safety issues.
We could easily make these rules work with some contractual changes and guess what. Our contract has a clause that says if government scheduling rules change both parties will negotiate contract changes. Why do you think that was added in the contract?
Numerous airlines (Atlas, Omni, Kalitta) operate under both rules and when they fly a pax trip they must meet 117 rules even though that crew may have been doing cargo flights 3 days prior. Keep in mind soon Sun Country and Mesa will also be doing both.
Last edited by Noworkallplay; 01-18-2020 at 09:04 PM.
01-18-2020, 10:07 PM
#127
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2018
Posts: 210
Originally Posted by Noworkallplay
Once again that’s speculation saying it would screw up flexibility. We shouldn’t have a bunch of day trips that make up 4 days of flying. It devalues the TAFB and credit compared to if it was all one pairing. By having 4 different pairings it allows the company to put you in sub when one of the trips conflicts with the other during irops. Its then put on the pilots back to either be a reservist during that dropped trip footprint or find a time to make it up. Its all in THE COMPANIES advantage. Numerous other airlines allow you to break up trips for swap/drop/add when they touch a base so don't give me the whole “by having 4 trips make up 4 days of flying it gives us pilots flexibility”. Sub is a joke. You pull me from a trip you pay me....
Every airline has shotgun Jr schedules. Thats called making the best of whats left at the end of a bid run. All those Jr guys operating under 117 at SWA, DL, UA, etc find a way to swap, drop, add and correct their lines. Why cant we with these rules?
Everyone understands we fly night hub turns when we are Jr. Why not do it safer if possible? If you want carved out then be ready to be carved out on everything because thats what they (company) will do and its going other places if you continue this attitude.
Its your career on the line being ok with being treated different on safety issues.
We could easily make these rules work with some contractual changes and guess what. Our contract has a clause that says if government scheduling rules change both parties will negotiate contract changes. Why do you think that was added in the contract?
Numerous airlines (Atlas, Omni, Kalitta) operate under both rules and when they fly a pax trip they must meet 117 rules even though that crew may have been doing cargo flights 3 days prior. Keep in mind soon Sun Country and Mesa will also be doing both.
Every airline has shotgun Jr schedules. Thats called making the best of whats left at the end of a bid run. All those Jr guys operating under 117 at SWA, DL, UA, etc find a way to swap, drop, add and correct their lines. Why cant we with these rules?
Everyone understands we fly night hub turns when we are Jr. Why not do it safer if possible? If you want carved out then be ready to be carved out on everything because thats what they (company) will do and its going other places if you continue this attitude.
Its your career on the line being ok with being treated different on safety issues.
We could easily make these rules work with some contractual changes and guess what. Our contract has a clause that says if government scheduling rules change both parties will negotiate contract changes. Why do you think that was added in the contract?
Numerous airlines (Atlas, Omni, Kalitta) operate under both rules and when they fly a pax trip they must meet 117 rules even though that crew may have been doing cargo flights 3 days prior. Keep in mind soon Sun Country and Mesa will also be doing both.
01-19-2020, 03:16 AM
#128
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 909
Originally Posted by BLOB
At the hub turn union meeting the other day the MEC officers said they don’t know what the impact of 117 would be on our bid packs. Their words. Not mine.
https://www.alpa.org/-/media/DAL/Doc...de-FAR-117.pdf
Where is our handy dandy quick reference guide?
C’mon man!!!!!
#onceagaindisappointedbyfdxmec
01-19-2020, 05:34 AM
#129
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 2,418
Originally Posted by magic rat
Well, if DAL MEC can figure it out, why can’t ours....
https://www.alpa.org/-/media/DAL/Doc...de-FAR-117.pdf
Where is our handy dandy quick reference guide?
C’mon man!!!!!
#onceagaindisappointedbyfdxmec
https://www.alpa.org/-/media/DAL/Doc...de-FAR-117.pdf
Where is our handy dandy quick reference guide?
C’mon man!!!!!
#onceagaindisappointedbyfdxmec
01-19-2020, 05:42 AM
#130
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: 757 Capt
Posts: 2,418
This is by no means verified, and hopefully, the format will come through-didn't the first time so this is a reattempt.FAR 117 Duty compare
Extensions up to 2 hours.
Only one Extension greater than 30 minutes until reset by a 30 hour rest Chose 4 legs for a FDP (1-2 legs basically add an hour for typical hub turn nights & day beginnings, starting fresh limits stay the same for AM launch)
AM Hub turns
FAR 117
1700-2200 11 Hours ext to 13
2200-2300 10 hours ext to 12
CBA
1600-0100 11:30 hours ext to 13
AM Starts
FAR 117
2300-0400 9 hours ext to 11
CBA
0100-0500 9 hours ext to 10:30
DAY
FAR 117
0500-0700 12 hours ext to 14
CBA
0500-0530 13 hours ext to 13:30_
0530-0600 13 hours ext to 14_
0600-0700 13 hours ext to 14:30
FAR 117
0700-1300 13 hours ext to 15_
CBA
0700-1300 13 hours ext to 14:30
FAR 117
1300-1700 12 hours ext to 14
CBA
1300-1600 13 hours ext to 14:30
1600-1700 11:30 hours ext to 13
FAR 117
1700-2200 11 hours ext to 13
CBA
1700-0100 11:30 hours ext to 13
Extensions up to 2 hours.
Only one Extension greater than 30 minutes until reset by a 30 hour rest Chose 4 legs for a FDP (1-2 legs basically add an hour for typical hub turn nights & day beginnings, starting fresh limits stay the same for AM launch)
AM Hub turns
FAR 117
1700-2200 11 Hours ext to 13
2200-2300 10 hours ext to 12
CBA
1600-0100 11:30 hours ext to 13
AM Starts
FAR 117
2300-0400 9 hours ext to 11
CBA
0100-0500 9 hours ext to 10:30
DAY
FAR 117
0500-0700 12 hours ext to 14
CBA
0500-0530 13 hours ext to 13:30_
0530-0600 13 hours ext to 14_
0600-0700 13 hours ext to 14:30
FAR 117
0700-1300 13 hours ext to 15_
CBA
0700-1300 13 hours ext to 14:30
FAR 117
1300-1700 12 hours ext to 14
CBA
1300-1600 13 hours ext to 14:30
1600-1700 11:30 hours ext to 13
FAR 117
1700-2200 11 hours ext to 13
CBA
1700-0100 11:30 hours ext to 13
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
