A duty time question
 

I have allegedly heard of a fictitious company in fantasy land operating like this. They fly single pilot charters part 135.

1. Call comes in for a trip. Pilot A takes the trip @ 0900
2. Pilot A returns from the trip @ 1200
3. Pilot A remains available to the company to take any trips until 1900. For a total duty time of 10 hours.
4. Pilot A then looks back to when he arrived, 1200 and considers his rest started at 1200 and therefore will accept another flight at 2200.
5. Per regs, rest must be free from availability to the company. My humble opinion is that technically pilot A is only getting 3 hours rest.

I see this as playing games with your duty. Fantasy land airplane company sees it as legal and allegedly has approval from the local fsdo to operate like this. I have asked for this in writing, yet fantasy company says there is nothing on paper. I do not think they are lying or being malicious in any way, but something just doesnt add up.

Whats your take?

You are correct. Standby(reserve) is not considered rest and for the company to imply that it does is wrong.

When ever you are on-call you're not on rest, nor are you on Duty. Duty is any activity involving flight. A good way to look at it is, if you can't drink a beer then it isn't rest. The pilot must be able to count back 24 hours and be able to find at least 9 consecutive hours of rest, 8 if reduced.

I am 135 scheduled and this is how our standby days work. Not sure if it's the same for non-scheduled.

Fantasy company is an on demand charter. Slightly different rules, but overall the same. Pilots need 10 consecutive in a 24hr period.

Somethings amiss. They claim since the pilots have the option of declining any flight they wish, then technically the pilots are not on call because they can decline it.

I think if a pilot has to answer his phone, hes not in rest.

Could Pilot A have a beer at 12:20? If not, it's not rest.

These kinds of 135 operators are all over the place. Usually a one crew per airframe outfit. In their world, you're in rest when you're not on duty. Same thing with the 13 scheduled days off per quarter. Go ahead and schedule the days, but they'll be moved whenever the airplane needs to fly. If the plane doesn't happen to fly on a scheduled day then great - there's one of your 13.

The FSDOs know all about it and look the other way. The companies get away with it because they're hiring lower time guys happy to be strapping into a jet for better than regional wages. No need to make waves - just hang out, get some turbine time, and wait for that dream 91 gig.

Sorry, rant over. :)

In order for an alleged violation of 14 CFR to be investigated and elevated to an Enforcement case, a case has to be built by "preponderance of the evidence" which is the standard required by Administrative Law. See FAA Order 2150.3b

Hypothetically speaking, the "fantasy" company's "time and duty" records would need to be carefully reviewed and compared to the Manifest/Trip Records. Actual "first person" surveillance (either direct observation or several rock solid witness statements) are helpful.

If someone hypothetically files a "complaint" directly to a FSDO or the FAA Hotline, it will get investigated (assuming the office is open...)

Don't file a complaint. Just choose not to work for them.

I'm not advocating breaking the rules, but going to the feds on the corporate/charter side of the fence is a good way to nuke your reputation. Even good operators bend the rules a little. When was the last time you saw a 135 crew weighing baggage? 135.121(a)? Do you honestly think a 135 crew will tell a high value client to put their own booze away? Everyone knows what to say on a 299 ride, the POI knows it's all BS, but the signoff happens anyway.

I'm not saying it's right, but it's helpful to have a little SA about this side of the industry. Work for the good operators, and ignore the crappy ones. But only go on a holy crusade with the FAA when you're absolutely sure you won't need a job with the bottom dwellers down the line. :)

Then I guess "hypothetically" one would need to evaluate whether providing information, which could potentially prevent the traveling public from getting hurt is more or less important than one's own career. A tough call indeed...

No, in order to stand up to appeal an enforcement action must have some basis in preponderance, but the FAA has a long history of taking action against pilots without being able to back it up. Under Administrative law, one is guilty until proven innocent; one's first chance for defense comes after one has already been "violated."

The FAA has often been more than willing to fire the shot knowing that often pilots don't appeal it, or that the damage is done anyway.

That's very true - and it's a shame that it's even something we need to talk about.

Let's say you're working for an on-demand charter company. You wake up one lazy morning at 9am, drink a pot of coffee while dicking around on the internet, and hang out with the wife all day. At 7pm you get a call from the company. How quickly can you reposition the airplane to XXX, then take four passengers to San Jose, Costa Rica?

It takes me 1.5 hours to get the airplane in the air to XXX, another .5 to XXX, a half an hour to board my passengers, then another 5.5 to Costa Rica. That has me landing at 3am. I've been up 18 hours. How safe is this - how do I feel? I want to ***** about it, but I'm also cognizant of all those pilots that would give their left nut to fly my airplane at half the money. I have a mortgage to pay. Eff it - I'll suck it up and fly.

I know it's easy to talk about the black and white on a message board, but this is the kind of thing many 135 pilots have to deal with on a regular basis.