New commuting rules coming.
06-15-2009 | 07:26 PM
#21
Happy to be here
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 18,563
Likes: 0
From: A-320A
Actually, it's very easy to require you to prove/certify that you are "in position" at your base for a legitimate rest opportunity for 8-12 (or pick another #) hours prior to operating your first flight of a trip. Problem is that your overall personal schedule will get way less productive, lest you live in domacile.
What is really totally unacceptable is that folks are "commuting" for 3 legs, 8-12 hours across the country getting into position, and then immediately starting their 12-18 hour day,
and then they ***** about being fatigued. 
IMO, Management's position will be, commute on your own time, and the "company's time" will include a verifyable rest period before begining a paring, just like the middle of a paring does, before each day's flying begins. Why is the first leg of a sequence any different? The big question will be, what will it cost? That's the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
What is really totally unacceptable is that folks are "commuting" for 3 legs, 8-12 hours across the country getting into position, and then immediately starting their 12-18 hour day,
and then they ***** about being fatigued. IMO, Management's position will be, commute on your own time, and the "company's time" will include a verifyable rest period before begining a paring, just like the middle of a paring does, before each day's flying begins. Why is the first leg of a sequence any different? The big question will be, what will it cost? That's the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
I live in base and would prefer to commute. Problem is that where I would commute out of would next to impossible. Add a rest period to it and I might as well live here.
I would love to see the trips changed, but that will not happen. Got to make the bosses happy.
06-15-2009 | 07:30 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
From: New Hire
It will not cost the government or the companies any money. It is just business and they will sell it as such.
I live in base and would prefer to commute. Problem is that where I would commute out of would next to impossible. Add a rest period to it and I might as well live here.
I would love to see the trips changed, but that will not happen. Got to make the bosses happy.
I live in base and would prefer to commute. Problem is that where I would commute out of would next to impossible. Add a rest period to it and I might as well live here.
I would love to see the trips changed, but that will not happen. Got to make the bosses happy.
06-15-2009 | 08:08 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
From: CL605 PIC
As was mentioned earlier, a lot of guys have >2 hour drives to their base. I personally am a lot less fatigued after a 2 hour fly-in commute than I am after getting up at 4am for a 2 hour drive to the airport. Kinda tough to catch an hour of shut-eye in the middle lane of the Interstate.
Where would you draw the line? What would classify as "commuting"?
06-15-2009 | 08:30 PM
#25
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
In the interest of being factually accurate. All of Ted Stevens' felonies were tossed out and dismissed. Making him just an regular old esteemed Senator.
06-15-2009 | 08:58 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
From: New Hire
Are you on drugs? Do away with commuting?? You're talking about probably north of 20000 pilots in the US uprooting their families...
As was mentioned earlier, a lot of guys have >2 hour drives to their base. I personally am a lot less fatigued after a 2 hour fly-in commute than I am after getting up at 4am for a 2 hour drive to the airport. Kinda tough to catch an hour of shut-eye in the middle lane of the Interstate.
Where would you draw the line? What would classify as "commuting"?
As was mentioned earlier, a lot of guys have >2 hour drives to their base. I personally am a lot less fatigued after a 2 hour fly-in commute than I am after getting up at 4am for a 2 hour drive to the airport. Kinda tough to catch an hour of shut-eye in the middle lane of the Interstate.
Where would you draw the line? What would classify as "commuting"?
Yes, I just took a tylenol PM. And perhaps people who commute now can be grandfathered in, but it simply has to go. I suppose if you fly a wide body and commute twice a month of if the company positive spaces you that's one thing, but commuting needs to be counted as duty time.
Flying to work is the type of commuting we are talking about.
06-15-2009 | 09:14 PM
#27
Da Hudge
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,473
Likes: 0
From: Poodle Whisperer
Correct "rest" issues and solve the housing problem all in one law? BRILLIANT!
stupid stupid stupid politicians. learn just enough about something to sound like you know what you're talking about to joe public and put some rediculous band-aid on a perceived problem that doesn't actually do a thing to correct the situation while screwing over thousands of people.
06-15-2009 | 09:27 PM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
From: MD-88 F/O
Seriously!?
OK, so the "airlines" have lost some passengers over the past few years to a few "fender benders." (Let's call it an even 2000 dead for a highly inaccurate number!) Anyway, the media in their quest for ratings will air the "dramatic" and "graphic" footage (repeatedly for effect) and promptly set up a panel of "aviation" experts to voice their opinions on whether or not "flying is still safe?"; "Are pilots properly trained?" "Qualified?" "Rested?" "Too young?" "Inexperienced?" - Etc! Seriously!?... Is this what I pay taxes for?
(Now for the soapbox moment) My point is simply - The FAA, Gov't, Media and highly misinformed John Q. Public will convene meetings, hold hearings and stare at the TV questioning whether or not pilots should be allowed to fly planes, commute to work, etc. and never realize that in the same timespan (3 yrs) that we've "lost" those 2000 - 100,000+ people have died driving in the US alone!
I think if the FAA/gov't/media wants to even entertain policing how we, as "highly paid professionals," get to work and regulate our sleep then they may want to mandate that everyone get's a "proven" 8 hours of rest (without the consumption of alcohol) before they sit behind the wheel of an automobile and head out for ANY sort of driving activity.
Quite frankly, that would save a Heck of a lot more people and is a much larger problem (as is many others) than wondering whether or not the Capt. on your flight to Rochester got enough sleep!? Seriously? You have more of a chance of getting killed falling off a ladder (or driving to work listening to a broadcast questioning aviation safety) than you do flying on the airlines! Yet the media continues to hammer the industry everytime there's an accident! Seriously!? Can't we help them find a better "crusade!?" I think it's time to see the forest for the trees...
Sorry. I rant because I care...
(Now for the soapbox moment) My point is simply - The FAA, Gov't, Media and highly misinformed John Q. Public will convene meetings, hold hearings and stare at the TV questioning whether or not pilots should be allowed to fly planes, commute to work, etc. and never realize that in the same timespan (3 yrs) that we've "lost" those 2000 - 100,000+ people have died driving in the US alone!
I think if the FAA/gov't/media wants to even entertain policing how we, as "highly paid professionals," get to work and regulate our sleep then they may want to mandate that everyone get's a "proven" 8 hours of rest (without the consumption of alcohol) before they sit behind the wheel of an automobile and head out for ANY sort of driving activity.
Quite frankly, that would save a Heck of a lot more people and is a much larger problem (as is many others) than wondering whether or not the Capt. on your flight to Rochester got enough sleep!? Seriously? You have more of a chance of getting killed falling off a ladder (or driving to work listening to a broadcast questioning aviation safety) than you do flying on the airlines! Yet the media continues to hammer the industry everytime there's an accident! Seriously!? Can't we help them find a better "crusade!?" I think it's time to see the forest for the trees...
Sorry. I rant because I care...
06-15-2009 | 10:10 PM
#29
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,618
Likes: 558
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Actually, it's very easy to require you to prove/certify that you are "in position" at your base for a legitimate rest opportunity for 8-12 (or pick another #) hours prior to operating your first flight of a trip. Problem is that your overall personal schedule will get way less productive, lest you live in domacile.
What is really totally unacceptable is that folks are "commuting" for 3 legs, 8-12 hours across the country getting into position, and then immediately starting their 12-18 hour day, and then they ***** about being fatigued.
IMO, Management's position will be, commute on your own time, and the "company's time" will include a verifyable rest period before begining a paring, just like the middle of a paring does, before each day's flying begins. Why is the first leg of a sequence any different? The big question will be, what will it cost? That's the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
What is really totally unacceptable is that folks are "commuting" for 3 legs, 8-12 hours across the country getting into position, and then immediately starting their 12-18 hour day,
and then they ***** about being fatigued. IMO, Management's position will be, commute on your own time, and the "company's time" will include a verifyable rest period before begining a paring, just like the middle of a paring does, before each day's flying begins. Why is the first leg of a sequence any different? The big question will be, what will it cost? That's the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
Legally there is no way in heck that they could require just commuters to show up early, but not everyone else. The only way that could pass a constitutional test would be to restrict ALL pilots to a hotel room for eight hours prior to show.
I actually get more rest commuting than if I was home...it's quiet time without kids or honey-do's. I would prefer to be home, but I get more rest on an airplane.
06-15-2009 | 10:16 PM
#30
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,618
Likes: 558
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
OK, so the "airlines" have lost some passengers over the past few years to a few "fender benders." (Let's call it an even 2000 dead for a highly inaccurate number!) Anyway, the media in their quest for ratings will air the "dramatic" and "graphic" footage (repeatedly for effect) and promptly set up a panel of "aviation" experts to voice their opinions on whether or not "flying is still safe?"; "Are pilots properly trained?" "Qualified?" "Rested?" "Too young?" "Inexperienced?" - Etc! Seriously!?... Is this what I pay taxes for?
(Now for the soapbox moment) My point is simply - The FAA, Gov't, Media and highly misinformed John Q. Public will convene meetings, hold hearings and stare at the TV questioning whether or not pilots should be allowed to fly planes, commute to work, etc. and never realize that in the same timespan (3 yrs) that we've "lost" those 2000 - 100,000+ people have died driving in the US alone!
I think if the FAA/gov't/media wants to even entertain policing how we, as "highly paid professionals," get to work and regulate our sleep then they may want to mandate that everyone get's a "proven" 8 hours of rest (without the consumption of alcohol) before they sit behind the wheel of an automobile and head out for ANY sort of driving activity.
Quite frankly, that would save a Heck of a lot more people and is a much larger problem (as is many others) than wondering whether or not the Capt. on your flight to Rochester got enough sleep!? Seriously? You have more of a chance of getting killed falling off a ladder (or driving to work listening to a broadcast questioning aviation safety) than you do flying on the airlines! Yet the media continues to hammer the industry everytime there's an accident! Seriously!? Can't we help them find a better "crusade!?" I think it's time to see the forest for the trees...
Sorry. I rant because I care...
(Now for the soapbox moment) My point is simply - The FAA, Gov't, Media and highly misinformed John Q. Public will convene meetings, hold hearings and stare at the TV questioning whether or not pilots should be allowed to fly planes, commute to work, etc. and never realize that in the same timespan (3 yrs) that we've "lost" those 2000 - 100,000+ people have died driving in the US alone!
I think if the FAA/gov't/media wants to even entertain policing how we, as "highly paid professionals," get to work and regulate our sleep then they may want to mandate that everyone get's a "proven" 8 hours of rest (without the consumption of alcohol) before they sit behind the wheel of an automobile and head out for ANY sort of driving activity.
Quite frankly, that would save a Heck of a lot more people and is a much larger problem (as is many others) than wondering whether or not the Capt. on your flight to Rochester got enough sleep!? Seriously? You have more of a chance of getting killed falling off a ladder (or driving to work listening to a broadcast questioning aviation safety) than you do flying on the airlines! Yet the media continues to hammer the industry everytime there's an accident! Seriously!? Can't we help them find a better "crusade!?" I think it's time to see the forest for the trees...
Sorry. I rant because I care...
Nothing freaks out the typical SUV-driving, bluetooth wearing, type A american more than being a helpless animal locked in an aluminum tube where all his usual bluster and attitude makes no difference at all as to the final outcome.
Plus the smoking wreckage makes for great media footage. Car crashes are only newsworthy if the vehicle contains at least 8 high school kids or illegal immigrants.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
