|
On-Call Is Not Rest
For those who do not know, there are several interpretive letters issued by the FAA regarding the definition of rest. Here is a quote from one of them, a letter from Donald P. Byrne, Assistant Chief Counsel, FAA, to Frederick G. Pappas, Jr., Director, Flight Services, Midwest Corporate Aviation, Inc. (June 24, 1991):
"[A] rest period must be prospective in nature. Stated another way, a flight crewmember must be told in advance that he or she will be on a rest period for the duration required by the regulations. In addition, a rest period must be free of all restraint....Moreover, a flight crewmember in a rest period must be free of present responsibility for work should the occasion arise." (see link below) The US Court of Appeals, First Circuit found that interpretation of rest to be reasonable. They also found that the FAA could take enforcement action against pilots and 135 certificate holders for violating that interpretation (again see link below). So, at the end of every 14 hours on call a 135 operator must release a pilot for 10 hours of rest if they expect him/her to be legal for another 14 hours at the beginning of the next 24. On-call is not rest time! If the company assigns and the pilot accepts a flight without 10 hours of rest (that were determined in advance, were continuous, and were free from any responsibility to the company) in the 24 preceding the end of duty, then the pilot and company can (and will according to FAA Notice (again see below link)) be violated! To give an example, if you (pilot) have been on call for 12 hours (say it's 2100) and company calls and assigns you duty from 2200 to 0200 it is a violation to assign/accept that flight. Realistically speaking (1 hour to report + 1 hour preflight + 12 = 14) at 12 hours on call, the company must give you 10 hours of rest before requiring you to report for duty. Come on guys, stop doing this stuff for these guys. Stop risking your certificate, future, and life (fatigue)! If the boss wants to have a jet available to him on a moments notice, then he should hire adequate crews to handle a situation like that. http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opin...9-1888-01A.pdf |
In another thread someone said:
Define "on-call" I'm sitting at home, have the option to sleep or not. Can do pretty much what I want. I can also choose to accept or decline a trip. This is the typical routine of most corporate/charter pilots. So am I on duty or in rest? What I am discussing here is charter only, not corporate. The Court defined two different on-call scenarios in their opinion. The first they called a "duty-to-report" status. The other they called a "duty-to-be-available" status. The full definitions are in the opinion if you are really bored, I mean interested. If I were in your shoes, I would think about the answer to this question to determine which status I fell under. Are you realistically able to choose whether or not to accept a flight? We always have a choice whether we fly or not, but what happens when you choose not to accept a flight (fatigue, etc.)? If you do not have a choice, then you fall under duty-to-report. The Court upheld the FAA interpretation of rest regarding duty-to-report. In that case everything I said in my previous post clearly applies. Though you are not on duty, you/the company cannot count your on-call time as rest. If you do have a choice, then you fall under duty-to-be-available. This scenario is not quite as clear. The Court states, "...one footnote in the FAA's brief, and its statements at oral argument, suggest that an unrequited duty-to-be-available is not "rest," but we are unwilling to bind the agency to the less-than-clear litigation position of its lawyers...". So, the FAA apparently does not consider this scenario to be rest. The Court however failed to decide the issue. Later in the opinion though, it implied if the FAA would clarify its position on the issue than it would find similarly to the duty-to-report scenario. If the FAA violates you for inadequate rest, do you really want to have to take it to the Court of Appeals to find out? Choice or not, on-call is not rest as far as my certificate is concerned. |
My POI would disagree with you. He thinks the way we do it is just fine, and I know because we where just investigated by the FAA because some prick that doesn't understand how flight and duty time works sent a nasty gram to the FAA, anonymously. The FAA looked at all our records and deemed that we where in compliance with the regs. There's a whole industry that is built upon last minute charters, and fitting into a cookie cutter mold just doesn't work. When I'm at home on call I am not on duty, I'm not working. It's your responsibility to stop flying if your fatigued! When I get somewhere at 3 am and I'm tired, I tell my company I'm tired and go to a hotel, and I've never been questioned.
BTW You posted the one interpretation, where's the other interpretations??? EDIT: BTW reading your second post, I would say I fall under "duty to be available" since I do have the choice to accept the trip or not. They may no be happy when I turn one down, but there's no repercussions if I do. |
Originally Posted by RedGuy
(Post 406666)
My POI would disagree with you.
When I'm at home on call I am not on duty, I'm not working. It's your responsibility to stop flying if your fatigued! When I get somewhere at 3 am and I'm tired, I tell my company I'm tired and go to a hotel, and I've never been questioned. BTW You posted the one interpretation, where's the other interpretations??? When you are on-call you are not able to have a couple of beers, get too far away from base, etc. You must be fit and available to fly, though it sounds like your company is reasonable. How do you know when to sleep, though? Doesn't it suck getting up to go fly on 3 hours of sleep? BTW, it is also the company's responsibility not to assign you to a flight if you are fatigued. You can use the link below to search for other interpretations. I only have the Word/PDF files. They all say the same thing, more or less. http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...terpretations/ |
Originally Posted by SR22
(Post 406690)
When you are on-call you are not able to have a couple of beers, get too far away from base, etc. You must be fit and available to fly, though it sounds like your company is reasonable. How do you know when to sleep, though? Doesn't it suck getting up to go fly on 3 hours of sleep? BTW, it is also the company's responsibility not to assign you to a flight if you are fatigued. You can use the link below to search for other interpretations. I only have the Word/PDF files. They all say the same thing, more or less. http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...terpretations/ Having a couple beers is over rated, but no if I want to be available I can't have a beer since then I would not be able to fly. But if I want to have a beer I can call in and say I'm going to be unavailable. Same thing if I need to go somewhere, or do something that's involved. I just call in and let them know I'm unavailable. The down side to that is that by calling in unavailable you may miss a big trip that pays really well. But I've even turned a couple of those down because I had other plans. As far as sleeping, I just sleep when I would normally sleep. I go to bed around 10pm, wake up when ever I wake up, and take a nap in the afternoon. Flying on three hours sleep really isn't bad at all once you get up and get out of the shower. The key thing about working on call is knowing your limits and staying within them. And if I worked at an employer that gave me a problem about refusing to fly because I was tired, that plane would sit right where it was and I'd be on the first buss home! I won't work for a company that doesn't respect my decisions and safety. Personally I feel that I'm better off where I'm at after hearing about how some of these scheduled carriers basically force you to fly if you answer the phone or if your even sick! No thanks! Being on call may suck, but it's as safe as you make it. |
Well, I guess the MI FSDO at KYIP will have to violate half the crews that try to depart tomorrow.
This topic has been beaten to death and we all know what the correct interpretation is. POI's know about it and they aren't violating pilots or operators. That may change eventually, but it hasn't yet. I am not risking my life, future or certificate for my boss. |
Originally Posted by timeless
(Post 407068)
This topic has been beaten to death and we all know what the correct interpretation is.
I am not risking my life, future or certificate for my boss. Here's a little something to keep in your back pocket until the next time you are tired, are fed up with unexpectedly climbing out of bed at 0200 and shooting an approach to mins on 3 hours sleep, want to improve your overall QOL (stable schedule = you can make plans), want to help other guys improve their QOL, and want to help create more jobs (so we all have more opportunities, you included). |
SR22, I have to disagree with your assertion that predictive rest would benefit pilots by creating more jobs and better QOL. The economics would simply decrease pay and opportunities, such as is happening with oil prices and increased fares in the scheduled passenger marketplace. Now with regulated markets and price control, I would agree with you and it looks like the next Presidential admin. might move in that direction, so perhaps your thinking is a bit progressive.
Furthur, you have cherry picked legal intrepretations and failed to get the entire legal picture and if you are really interested, I would suggest searching the 121 supplemental rullings. Please understand I am not arguing from a safety standpoint or a social view as these are totally different conversations. But the legal precident is clear and the economic situation is well founded. By the way, do you have a dog in this fight? If so, why not get another job? You mention in your first point "stop doing this stuff for these guys" What guys? I consider myself part of one company not divided by us and them and have been treated likewise. Just curious and thanks for the interesting post and conversation. |
Really as a whole, there are pilots that will and some that won't go "above and beyound" and fly no matter what. As long as you, individually, make a stand about what your interpretation of the rules are, you're usually ok. I did this when I worked 135, and regardless of what a few of the "Go-To" guys were doing, I covered my own rear. In the end, it is really our responsibility to protect ourselves, not the POI's, chief pilot, or DO.
|
Like coyote said you would not increase jobs, or QOL, you would probably put a large segment of the 135 business, out of business. It's called "unscheduled 135" for a reason. If you don't like it, go work for the regionals. Then see how well rested you feel after spending 9 hours in some dumpy hotel on a 4 day trip with them, but hey at least you'll know when you'll be tired. It seems to me that your more interested in increasing your QOL than you really are about safety, and just using safety for the argument.
Here's a little something to keep in your back pocket until the next time you are tired, are fed up with unexpectedly climbing out of bed at 0200 and shooting an approach to mins on 3 hours sleep, want to improve your overall QOL (stable schedule = you can make plans), want to help other guys improve their QOL, and want to help create more jobs (so we all have more opportunities, you included). BTW Who's to say I'm not rested with 3 hours sleep? Or who's to say that someone who has 10 hours off will sleep during that 10 hours? I've said it before, you can't legislate good judgment. I may be well rested with just a few hours sleep while someone else may need 12hours of sleep to feel rested. Also you may still be crawling out of bed unexpectedly at 2am as while some pilots will do their 14 hours during the day, someone else will still have to cover the night shift. Also this 2am call out you keep talking about is pretty rare where I work. |
Originally Posted by coyote
(Post 407327)
SR22, I have to disagree with your assertion that predictive rest would benefit pilots by creating more jobs and better QOL.
Originally Posted by coyote
(Post 407327)
Furthur, you have cherry picked legal intrepretations and failed to get the entire legal picture and if you are really interested, I would suggest searching the 121 supplemental rullings.
I did find many interpretations issued by the Chief Counsel's office that define rest, both 135 and 121. If I recall correctly there was even one that went back to the time of the CAA (FAA's predecessor, I believe). Every one of those interpretations defined rest in terms similar to those in my previous posts. If you know of an opinion/interpretation that defines rest differently, perhaps you could direct me to a particular case. If I have missed something (due to lack of access or whatever), I am not afraid to admit I'm wrong. It was not my intent to be persuasive by selecting only certain cases. Even assuming a contradictory 121 supplemental opinion, how do you see that affecting this opinion? It is my understanding that 121 and 135 rest regs have historically been treated differently. From what I've read, there were years of interpretations defining rest for 121 purposes before a single 135 interpretation came along.
Originally Posted by coyote
(Post 407327)
I consider myself part of one company not divided by us and them and have been treated likewise. Just curious and thanks for the interesting post and conversation.
|
Originally Posted by RedGuy
(Post 407360)
If you don't like it, go work for the regionals. Then see how well rested you feel after spending 9 hours in some dumpy hotel on a 4 day trip with them, but hey at least you'll know when you'll be tired.
See, to me that even doesn't sound that bad. I don't mind working at all. What I absolutely hate is getting called out at 2200 or so after you've been awake all day and getting sent on a 14+ hour duty day. The you fly home, and sleep all day, get up for a while, force yourself to go back to sleep that night, then be up all day the next day and get called out late again that night. Just the fact that I don't have to answer the phone after my 12 hours is up would be a huge relief. http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...4&postcount=49 Geez, I don't understand why some guys can't just say thanks! :D |
Actually after talking to some people that work at the regionals, it turns out what I do isn't all that bad. Ever hear of a high speed? I won't lie to you being on call sucks, but it's far from unsafe.
I don't know where you work, but most of the on call pilots I know don't make 100K, and it wouldn't be dividing 100K up twice, it'd be more like dividing $50-60K up 4 or 5 times. So if you can live off of something like $12k so you can sleep at night, go right ahead, but personally I need to make more than that to live on, and demand more than that as a professional. Many of these on demand 135's aren't running with a huge profit margin, so increasing staff would come with a decrease in pay. Also many 135 on demand companies don't really pay a salary, so if you don't fly, you don't make any money. This isn't anything new pilots have been flying on call for decades, and as long as there's manufacturing industry and people still need emergency medical flights pilots will be on call. Now there are jobs out there where you have a set 9-5 schedule, but generally those are flight instructing. BTW You can make about $50k flight instructing if your any good, so why not try that. Oh, and you never did divulge what your interest in this is, did you get fired from an on demand operator? |
Whatever you want to call it, the burden is on you to make sure you're safe, legal and rested.
Don't depend on the company to tell you what to do because they will sell your soul to make a dollar. They will push you to do things you shouldn't do and then self-disclose to the FAA when your incident comes to light. You'll be the only one in the room without a chair when the music stops. Don't be that guy or gal! |
Originally Posted by SR22
(Post 407928)
Below is RedGuy considering leaving his job to fly for Pinnacle, not three months ago (link following):
See, to me that even doesn't sound that bad. I don't mind working at all. What I absolutely hate is getting called out at 2200 or so after you've been awake all day and getting sent on a 14+ hour duty day. The you fly home, and sleep all day, get up for a while, force yourself to go back to sleep that night, then be up all day the next day and get called out late again that night. Just the fact that I don't have to answer the phone after my 12 hours is up would be a huge relief. http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/sh...4&postcount=49 Geez, I don't understand why some guys can't just say thanks! :D Here is something you can say to just about anyone. Company: Are you refusing to fly? Pilot: No, I'm not. However, I am "unable to accept" the trip/pairing the way you have it built. Company: Are you refusing to fly? Pilot: Of course not. Are YOU asking me to operate the aircraft in an unsafe manner? Company: Are you refusing to fly? Pilot: Of course not, I'm telling you that I'm fatigued and thus "unable to accept" the pairing without legal period prior to the trip. I'm your guy but I need some rest prior to block out. The company can usually fire you for insubordination or refusing a trip. Thus, never refuse a trip and never act unprofessional. In each of these examples, you are cordial, professional and to the point. You never refuse a trip and even better, you offer up a solution. |
Thanks for the good advice, bustinmins.
|
We operate 14CFR Part 135, like most here do.
We abide by the applicable FAR's and OpSpecs, they are literally our law and rules we have live by.
The reason why the FAA has not changed the FAR's is because the really can't, it is to Grey of an area and legal does not want to touch it. If they would set it in stone, there is no way around it and it would kill probably the biggest industry in the USA. The unscheduled Part 135 industry. For years I have been hearing they want to start using ICAO, JAR rules for Unscheduled 135. They still haven't:confused: http://eu-ops.luftfartstilsynet.no/w...ing-8-2008.pdf Starts at page 191, Subpart Q. And just a side remark, Part 135 has been operating like this for many many many years and there is always certain types of people that can't handle 135 Unscheduled and generally as it turns out they just can't handle 121 either and tend to drop out of commercial aviation all together. In my years of doing 135, and yes which I am still doing and will be till I retire, I have seen quite a few and I am fairly sure I just recognized one more:rolleyes: |
I've done a little research and the simplest explanation I can come up with is outlined in a couple of Chief Counsel Opinions from 2007 and 2005 (links below).
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...07/schwarz.pdf http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...ill135267f.DOC They both state that in order for time to be counted as "rest," it has to have three criteria. Rest must be 1) continuous, 2) determined prospectively, (i.e. known in advance) and 3) free from all restraint by the certificate holder, including freedom from present responsibility from work should the occasion arise. Nowhere does it say that "on call" time is considered duty time, but it's also not considered rest time. The book "Everything Explained For The Professional Pilot" by Richie Lengel seems to agree with this. One of the most interesting things I came across is that if you look at the rest time requirements laid out for flight attendants in 135.273 (by flipping the page after looking at the pilot duty time regs) you'll see that it begins with definitions for calendar day, duty period, and rest period. If those same definitions were copied word for word into the beginning of 135.267 (the flight crew rest time requirements) there wouldn't be any question about it. At my company we're almost definitely in violation because we're on call 24/7 and are paid on salary. Therefore we are more or less required to take any trips that come up. (Obviously we don't do anything crazy or unsafe, but pop up trips are fairly common.) I still have a few questions that I haven't been able to figure out: 1. Does anyone know of a company (or pilot for that matter) that's ever been violated because of this? I'm guessing you can't look this up on the FAA website, but obviously someone got in trouble back in 1999 to prompt that appeal to the first circuit court. 2. How would a company successfully operate a non-scheduled operation without being in violation of the law? As far as I can tell, you can either operate on a ten hour callout so you can get your rest time in, or you can count your on call time as duty time and only be on call for 14 hours at a time. Of course when the average trip (in my case anyway) lasts about 12 hours you can only really be useful for the first two of your 14 hours. Any ideas? By the way, apparently the NATA wants to change the rules. I found a proposal for it here: http://www.nata.aero/filedownload?da..._ID&rowId=3590 That's all I got. |
Originally Posted by DylanFan
(Post 419370)
I've done a little research and the simplest explanation I can come up with is outlined in a couple of Chief Counsel Opinions from 2007 and 2005 (links below).
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...07/schwarz.pdf http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...ill135267f.DOC They both state that in order for time to be counted as "rest," it has to have three criteria. Rest must be 1) continuous, 2) determined prospectively, (i.e. known in advance) and 3) free from all restraint by the certificate holder, including freedom from present responsibility from work should the occasion arise. At our company, we make every attempt to follow the guidleines to the "t" and err to the conservative side in the grey areas. For example we are only assigned to be on-call for 10 hour periods thoughout the day, after which we are assigned rest for at least nine hours so that we are legal for another full duty period the next day. (10 hours rest for ops under 135.267) That on-call period is "duty time" as we are not free from the constraints of the company and it is not prospectively identified as rest. If I get a call on hour nine of my on-call period, then I can fly, however I only have six hours of duty remaining unless I am on reduced from the rest period before...in which case I would have less. |
Originally Posted by VTcharter
(Post 419438)
At our company, we make every attempt to follow the guidleines to the "t" and err to the conservative side in the grey areas. For example we are only assigned to be on-call for 10 hour periods thoughout the day, after which we are assigned rest for at least nine hours so that we are legal for another full duty period the next day. (10 hours rest for ops under 135.267) That on-call period is "duty time" as we are not free from the constraints of the company and it is not prospectively identified as rest. If I get a call on hour nine of my on-call period, then I can fly, however I only have six hours of duty remaining unless I am on reduced from the rest period before...in which case I would have less.
|
Don't get me wrong here, Dylan. In general, I like your post, but I would like to use your post to respond to a couple of things.
Originally Posted by DylanFan
(Post 419370)
If those same definitions were copied word for word into the beginning of 135.267 (the flight crew rest time requirements) there wouldn't be any question about it.
Originally Posted by DylanFan
(Post 419370)
Does anyone know of a company (or pilot for that matter) that's ever been violated because of this? I'm guessing you can't look this up on the FAA website, but obviously someone got in trouble back in 1999 to prompt that appeal to the first circuit court.
Instead of wasting time trying to find out whether anyone has been violated, spend that time educating your buddies. If everybody is on the same page, then they can't single you out. If you really want to know though, you are in for a lot of searching that ultimately may not give you a conclusive answer. Many violations are settled without a hearing, and therefore don't result in any kind of a searchable record. Unless we get lucky and someone who has been violated happens to read this thread, then you may never know. PM me if you want information on how to search for that information. As to the second sentence in the quote, the appeal was not the result of a violation. In 1999, the FAA issued a 'Notice of Enforcement'. The Notice expressed the FAA's intent to rigorously enforce their interpretation of rest against operators and pilots. A group of fifty charter companies challenged the Notice and the rest interpretation in Court. They lost. |
Originally Posted by SR22
(Post 421655)
121 crews and even flight attendants, as you noted, abide by this definition of rest.
|
Thanks to RedGuy I now know the meaning of the word "flame-bait".
I did not say ALL 121 operators and crews operate in compliance with this definition, though I would wager most do. Every working pilot reading this thread, myself included, is probably well aware that many operations exist that have the pilots on-call 24/7. That's the point of this thread! It doesn't matter how many other operations are violating the law besides yours. If you went into court and argued that you thought it was okay to speed because the other guy was doing it, do you think the judge would buy it? On-call is not rest! Prove me wrong, or go haunt some other thread! |
Originally Posted by DylanFan
(Post 419884)
If you are on call for 10 hours and then get 10 hours rest (under 135.267) it seems like a company would need twice as many pilots to operate. Even then, I can't see how you would keep a plane covered (always ready to go within an hour or two) without even more than that. How exactly does your crew scheduling work? I also wonder how air ambulance operators do it without breaking the regs.
I guess that our management has just decided that the amount of midnight call outs that we receive do not offset the cost of staffing the airplanes heavier than we already do. At some point that may not be the case, but at that point we will just hire more people, not interpret the regs for our convenience. |
Originally Posted by SR22
(Post 422849)
Thanks to RedGuy I now know the meaning of the word "flame-bait".
I did not say ALL 121 operators and crews operate in compliance with this definition, though I would wager most do. Every working pilot reading this thread, myself included, is probably well aware that many operations exist that have the pilots on-call 24/7. That's the point of this thread! It doesn't matter how many other operations are violating the law besides yours. If you went into court and argued that you thought it was okay to speed because the other guy was doing it, do you think the judge would buy it? On-call is not rest! Prove me wrong, or go haunt some other thread! I'm not flame baiting you, you stated that 121 crews abide by bla bla bla. The reason most 121 crews can have set time off is that probably 90% of 121 is the airlines, WHICH ARE SCHEDULED!!! It seems you hold 121 to some gold standard, but in the end it's no different than any other operation. There's scheduled 121 and unscheduled 121, same goes for 135. And the 121 on demand operators are running their crews the same way 135 on demand operators do. BTW Why are you on a crusade about this again? Your not going to change an industry that's been operating this way since before the FAA even existed. That was a flame bait BTW! The rule in the FAR does not say that being on call is not rest, it doesn't even define rest other than "Not to be assigned any duties" and as far as I'm concerned being on call is not a duty since I'm not at work, I'm sitting comfortably at home. In the end being safe all comes down to your own intelligence, if your tired turn down the trip! It's that simple! So I really don't care what the court says, until they change the rule, I'm going to be on call. I will stop "Haunting" your thread now since I will never change your mind about this, and you will never change mine. BTW here's 135.263 and 135.267 for your reading enjoyment! § 135.263 Flight time limitations and rest requirements: All certificate holders. (a) A certificate holder may assign a flight crew member and a flight crewmember may accept an assignment for flight time only when the applicable requirements of §§135.263 through 135.271 are met. (b) No certificate holder may assign any flight crewmember to any duty with the certificate holder during any required rest period. (c) Time spent in transportation, not local in character, that a certificate holder requires of a flight crewmember and provides to transport the crewmember to an airport at which he is to serve on a flight as a crewmember, or from an airport at which he was relieved from duty to return to his home station, is not considered part of a rest period. (d) A flight crewmember is not considered to be assigned flight time in excess of flight time limitations if the flights to which he is assigned normally terminate within the limitations, but due to circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), are not at the time of departure expected to reach their destination within the planned flight time. § 135.267 Flight time limitations and rest requirements: Unscheduled one- and two-pilot crews. (a) No certificate holder may assign any flight crewmember, and no flight crewmember may accept an assignment, for flight time as a member of a one- or two-pilot crew if that crewmember's total flight time in all commercial flying will exceed— (1) 500 hours in any calendar quarter. (2) 800 hours in any two consecutive calendar quarters. (3) 1,400 hours in any calendar year. (b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, during any 24 consecutive hours the total flight time of the assigned flight when added to any other commercial flying by that flight crewmember may not exceed— (1) 8 hours for a flight crew consisting of one pilot; or (2) 10 hours for a flight crew consisting of two pilots qualified under this part for the operation being conducted. (c) A flight crewmember's flight time may exceed the flight time limits of paragraph (b) of this section if the assigned flight time occurs during a regularly assigned duty period of no more than 14 hours and— (1) If this duty period is immediately preceded by and followed by a required rest period of at least 10 consecutive hours of rest; (2) If flight time is assigned during this period, that total flight time when added to any other commercial flying by the flight crewmember may not exceed— (i) 8 hours for a flight crew consisting of one pilot; or (ii) 10 hours for a flight crew consisting of two pilots; and (3) If the combined duty and rest periods equal 24 hours. (d) Each assignment under paragraph (b) of this section must provide for at least 10 consecutive hours of rest during the 24-hour period that precedes the planned completion time of the assignment. (e) When a flight crewmember has exceeded the daily flight time limitations in this section, because of circumstances beyond the control of the certificate holder or flight crewmember (such as adverse weather conditions), that flight crewmember must have a rest period before being assigned or accepting an assignment for flight time of at least— (1) 11 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by not more than 30 minutes; (2) 12 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by more than 30 minutes, but not more than 60 minutes; and (3) 16 consecutive hours of rest if the flight time limitation is exceeded by more than 60 minutes. (f) The certificate holder must provide each flight crewmember at least 13 rest periods of at least 24 consecutive hours each in each calendar quarter. |
Originally Posted by RedGuy
(Post 423486)
BTW Why are you on a crusade about this again?
Seriously though, this opinion is for real if anybody ever needs it. Scheduled or not, they have several options available to them to provide us with a stable schedule. Speaking of which, sounds like a pretty cool gig VTcharter. Smart people. This isn't the airlines, folks. Seats aren't going for $100. Don't fall for their, "It'll put us out of business," BS. If they can afford charter, they can afford proper staffing. |
Originally Posted by VTcharter
(Post 423317)
It does require a few more employees, however this is the cost of doing business in a legal and safe way. If a business cannot be run according to legal restraints, then it is time to find a new line of business. I know that it can be done successfully, as we do it every day and we are growing at an amazing rate. We also do not run an on call crew 24 hours per day. Our on call schedule ends in the evening and starts back up in the morning. We operate 24 hours a day, but only scheduled trips will go into the overnight hours. Another thing that could happen is to take crewmembers who are scheduled to be off, and call them to see if they want to fly...no pressure to do it though. In that case, the crewmembers will have been on rest because they have been scheduled OFF for the time preceeding the call.
I guess that our management has just decided that the amount of midnight call outs that we receive do not offset the cost of staffing the airplanes heavier than we already do. At some point that may not be the case, but at that point we will just hire more people, not interpret the regs for our convenience. |
SR22, Thanks for your your posts. Very informative and thought provoking. I am one of the guys on the receiving end of this dirty stick. Sitting "Hot Call" with no idea when rest begins or ends and having to be ready to fly (wheels up in one hour) is brutal. I am obligated to sit for days and be ready at any moment to go, no rest period even remotely identified by dispatch. No adult beverages during what could be indefinate days of hot call. BTW this little dance can go on the entire 18 days of my rotation. Thanks for your post.
|
Originally Posted by Easymoney
(Post 424891)
SR22...Thanks for your post.
|
You always have the option to decline a flight based on fatigue (ie: your 10hour rest-period ended at 6am, and they call you for a flight that evening for a Vegas run from 9pm-8am. Lord knows you haven't continued to "rest" all day long.)
Search on how many reports are filed for errors made due to fatigue: ASRS - Aviation Safety Reporting System |
In the on-demand charter biz, rest ain't a problem till it's a problem. It's up to you (the pilot) to be sure it does not become a problem. Clear as mud huh?
|
A couple of final (we'll see) thoughts on the subject.
The problem with leaving it up to pilots to call fatigue is that certain "go to" pilots and operators can end up with an unfair competitive advantage. If an operator has a pilot that they can push to fly on three hours of sleep, how do you think they are going to view the guy that (unbelievably!) requires eight hours immediately prior to working a fourteen hour day? Very specifically dictating what does and does not constitute rest, levels the playing field. Regarding the scheduled vs. unscheduled issue, 91K ops also comply with this definition of rest. Those are not scheduled ops, and we all know how Netjets is just barely scraping by. :rolleyes: |
excellent post SR22! There has been debate on this topic for as long as I can remember. As far as I can say, the debate is simply the result of an operators greed, and a pilots ignorance. There should be no debate on the topic, as the chief counsel has on numerous occasions defined the "gray area" to black and white conditions.
I would like to draw attention to one more counsel oppinion that was in response to a HEMES operation, but the language is identical to a regular on demand operation. Its the November 9, 1990 (#1) oppinion. "Your first question asks whether FAR Section 135.271 allows an operator to schedule a pilot for 24 hours of standby duty where the pilot would have no other duties assigned except that he or she must be rested and ready to respond for duty when called. Section 135.271(d) states: "Each flight crewmember must receive at least 8 consecutive hours of rest during any 24 consecutive hour period of HEMES assignment. A flight crewmember must be relieved of the HEMES assignment if he or she has not or cannot receive at least 8 consecutive hours of rest during any 24 consecutive hour period of a HEMES assignment." A pilot on 24-hour standby duty in your scenario must be available for duty anytime during the 24-hour period. Even if the standby pilot is not called to duty during the 24-hour standby period, that 24-hour standby period cannot be considered rest. The FAA has consistently interpreted its "rest" requirements to be satisfied only if the rest time is determined prospectively, free from all duty, and free from all present responsibility for work or duty. A standby pilot has a present responsibility to work if called; therefore he or she is on duty and must be assigned the required rest period in FAR Section 135.271(d)." As far as I am concerned, this is an open and shut case. Just because your POI allows it, doesn't make it any more legal. Your POI may be the guy that determines to violate you, but if a notice of enforcement comes down from above and he is told to enforce this more stringently (like they have done in the past) then its your certificates. As far as the economics of it are concerned...when all operators begin to follow the rules, the customers who use those operators will begin to learn and accept the changes. If it means hiring more crews, then it means raising prices on the aircraft to compensate, and the kinks will work themselvs out. Those operators that wont raise prices and reduce wages will get pilots from the bottom of the barrel and business will suffer as a result. Air ambulance margins are enormous and they can afford multiple crews. Just my 1.5 cents. This is a great topic, and glad to see people arent responding like it were a youtube comment section... |
Dear Flyboyjake,
Unfortunately, everyone who agrees with you has been terminated; (ref: Darwin, The Origin of Species) Good Day, Good Night and best of luck in your battles. Kindest Regards, Coyote |
Interestingly, in the 121 world, DOMESTIC reserves are required to have the 10 hours prospective rest, but INTERNATIONAL reserves are considered available for 24 hours a day for the entire number of days on call, with no stated rest periods.
Joe |
Coyote,
I fail to see the relevance to darwin...Those who agree with me are far from the weak. interestingly, in a roundabout way, the FAA agrees. This doesn't mean I am going to be the first to go cry to the FSDO that they are breaking the rules. I have my own arse to look out for. I guess I'm not sure what you mean |
joepilot, I havent been in the 121 word, but is that a company expectation or is that coded in the 121 puzzle somewhere?
|
Originally Posted by flyboyjake
(Post 518313)
Coyote,
I fail to see the relevance to darwin...Those who agree with me are far from the weak. interestingly, in a roundabout way, the FAA agrees. This doesn't mean I am going to be the first to go cry to the FSDO that they are breaking the rules. I have my own arse to look out for. I guess I'm not sure what you mean |
you can be flexible right into a 168hr work week if you wish. I have never read Chucks book, but the legitimacy of an operator requiring its pilots to contradict the overseeing government laws isn't remotely related to the flexibility of a pilot. On that note, are you saying that a pilot shouldn't turn down a trip in a plane with no seatbelts because he should be more flexible? Sure its an extreme, but its the same concept. Just because people have been getting away with it doesn't mean we should turn our heads and continue.
Coyote, do you disagree that it is illegal? and if no, what is your stake in it? Fly safe :) |
Originally Posted by coyote
(Post 518006)
Dear Flyboyjake,
Unfortunately, everyone who agrees with you has been terminated; (ref: Darwin, The Origin of Species) Good Day, Good Night and best of luck in your battles. Kindest Regards, Coyote I was happy to see the word 'Unfortunately' in your post. Maybe you really are a line pilot, and not a management troll. I'm still looking for that "other" rest definition you mentioned, Capt'n. ;) Jake, thanks for the compliment! Oh, and I haven't been terminated. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:28 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands