nwaf16dude

Read this if you don't understand Eagle's post above...

Amazon.com: Retirement Heist: How Companies Plunder and Profit from the Nest Eggs of American Workers (9781591843337): Ellen E. Schultz: Books

A must-read book.

jsled

Yea Right. And the new FTDT rules had nothing to do with politics either. Or the new NMB union voting rules (much opposed by those on the right side of the isle in Congress). Just keep telling yourself that. I am sure you are right.

Sled (fellow Texan)

eaglefly

Man, I wish I had a good resolution for you. This profession's pilots are now like the passengers on the Titanic who've suspected all along the water level seemed to be rising and now it's almost to the main deck and obvious (actually, that's ironic as we've been passengers regarding our careers and our bargaining representatives for too long and this is the inevitable result).

ALPA dispatched a great band (a wind section - pun intended) to play for us to soothe and calm everyone that all will be well and that the mighty hand was there to represent us and protect the profession, but that's obviously turned out to be a complete farce.

In fact, based on the compensation levels of the Herndon crowd, one can argue those represented have been (supposedly) protected from the 1%...........well, apparently by the same 1%. The compensation levels for that group hasn't so much as hiccuped in the last decade to my knowledge, while at the same time the saps who have provided that for them have been gutted from stem to stern.

Very likely, after the TWA damages are awarded, in addition to a new code of "P" on our checks (for PBGC) in the pre-tax deduction column, current ALPA pilots checks could also include and "A" (for ALPA dues/assessment). Of course, the previous sentance isn't real, but I've heard ALPA is now self-insured, having been dumped after their last faliure of DFR (UAL ?). If so, they may have nowhere to go but to join their pals in Washington and airline management in the increasingly long line to take another bite out of your earnings.

There's a hundred ways to skin a cat (or skim a pilot) and where it all goes doesn't matter if it's not to the pilot.

eaglefly

Yes, that was a classic. Lives are at stake and they stall the process out 3 years after the most RECENT accident and then are awarded another 2 years for implementation. On top of that, the package seems to mitigate any costly provisions with ones that save money like allowing 9 hours flying, instead of 8 in a duty period, which at my carrier will allow a whole new batch of one-day turn-arounds like ORD to everywhere on the west cost. Throw in WX and legal to start/legal to finish and I can see someone plowing into the approach lights late one night after one of those (or perhaps an ill-timed emergency at the end).

No matter, the 1% is pleased.........very pleased.

jsled

The 9 hrs of flying is very specific on duty start times. As for "legal to start, legal to finish". That is GONE. The flight times are HARD baby!


From the ALPA Fastread:


Maximum Flight Time Limits, Unaugmented Hard limit, not extendable. See Table below.


Time of Report (Acclimated) Maximum flight time (hours)
0000-0459 8
0500-1959 9
2000-2359 8

jsled

Here is what your carrier said about the new FTDT, and yes, the proposal DID include the 9 hours of flight time. Just as the final rule did.

American, American Eagle: Rest and duty rules will force airlines to hire a bunch more pilots | Airline Biz Blog | dallasnews.com

Making the rounds Tuesday is a document that American Airlines and American Eagle submitted Oct. 12 to the Office of Management and Budget with their claims that they'll need many more pilots if the Federal Aviation Administration adopts new rest and experience requirements on airlines.

In the presentation, American and American Eagle said they would need 6 percent to 30 eprcent more pilots as a result of the "notice of proposed rule-making" (NPRM).

American said that it would need 430 to 2,400 additional pilots because of the proposed rule, while American Eagle said it would need about 240 pilots.

"Applied to the industry as a whole, and based on data from individual carriers aggregated by the ATA [Air Transport Association], the average carrier will need to hire 9.6% more pilots prior to the effective date of the NPRM," the presentation to the OMB said. "Based on current pilot employment levels from [industry filings], this implies an industry-wide shortfall of 7,160 pilots."

According to the OMB disclosure, American Eagle president and CEO Dan Garton and Will Ris, senior vice president of government affairs for AMR and American Airlines, led the airlines' visit to the OMB.

Click here for the filing.

Their position was that the rules will require more pilots, and the requirement that pilots have 1,500 hours logged will limit the number of qualified applicants.

In the AE/AA math, the shortage of 7,160 pilots @ 10 pilots per airplane would mean that 716 airplanes would not be staffed, leading to 2,505 fewer round trips a day, with 716 markets no longer served.

American's pilots, represented by the Allied Pilots Association, and other pilot groups have presented the counter-argument, that the rules are needed to make sure rested pilots are in the cockpit.

eaglefly

OK, some good news and thanks for the clarification. But all in all, my points above do show that safety is.........well, a concern so long as its affordable. This whole sham is but another in a long line of past shams and ones to come still.

So, those being "hard limits" and "not extendable", if one gets, say a hold that will project them over 8 or 9 hours, do they land and go to a hotel (or if say, they fly to ORD from the west coast and can't return within 9 hours total flying time) ?

or

Are they like current, in that as long as its "scheduled", one can fly over as long as they are remain within 16 hours (takeoff on last leg within their MOT time) ?

gloopy

Correct. However its fair to ask who will have to pay for it if AMR has to keep the pensions.

There is a certain cost to that pension plan, especially in a market that is volitile and constantly subjected to massive plunges in value no matter how diversified. If the plan is kept, even if frozen, the money it will take to perpetually fund it has to come from somewhere. I'm sure AMR would LOVE to keep the pensions...if they could outsource 100 seaters at AE/AC, A321's at JB, 737-900's at AS and 777's at BA as much as they want with no restrictions. Oh and throw in a 20-30% pay cut for remaining pilots as well as other benefit and QOL cuts. I'm sure AMR management could show how, if they only had all that, they could keep those noble, solemn obligations to their beloved workers.

Give them all that and I'm sure AMR will be happy to put those pensions in whatever "lockbox" it takes to secure their immortality. But the means to that end might be more nefarious than the alternative for anyone with more than a few years left there and certainly for the rest of the industry.

I don't know how they will handle this situation, other than to state the obvious that at the very least the lump sump payouts will either end or be significantly reduced and the program will very likely end up frozen. Beyond that anything is possible, depending on whatever else happens. But pick your poison.

eaglefly

Actually, the intial figure was the 2400 one. When UAL and DAL only claimed to need something like the 400 figure, um.........well, something suddenly changed on the projections.

Gee, what a surprise ?

That being said, it's what to expect of all the carriers managements. They are profit-oriented businessmen and promptly dispatched their lapdog the ATA to profess doom and gloom. Most will play the new rules as difficult as to say they aren't really that bad, would only invite more persuit of harder (and less profitable) restrictions.

So, in essence, what they were saying was in effect, "yes, these are provisions that are deemed to improve safety, but we can't afford them". Apparently the industry believes it's cheaper (more profitable) to tolerate a fatigue related accident now and then and let the insurance handle it, then chip further into the bottom line.

I think that's what they teach at Wharton in the first semester of the first year. I think it's even up on the chalkboard through that semester to drill it into the heads of the students. Business 101.

jsled

Not sure, but the max duty day is 9-14 hours depending on show time. That will go a long way towards mitigating fatigue. The way I understand it, if you are at the gate or on the ground in the conga line, and the flight plan time will put you over 8/9. Go back/stay at the gate. In any case, the airlines better build a little pad if they want schedule integrity.

Sled