25 Dead for better work rules
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: CR7 FO
Posts: 141
While I agree with you to an extent SAAB, I must say that small improvments could go a long way.
First, I feel that reduced-rest overnights should be a contingancy rather than a plan. If an airline needs to reduce a crew's rest to operate on-schedule due to delays, so be it, but it shouldn't be planned upon and built into schedules.
Second, we should never be compelled to extend duty to 16 hours. I believe NWA's contract allows duty to be extended to 16 hrs at the pilot's descression but it is not required. If this were FAR, airlines could keep on schedule in weather without risking fatigue. If all I have done is a couple of legs and got a good La-z-boy nap in, I'll fly into the 15th or 16th hour to get to the overnight. However if I have been sitting unblocked at the gate waiting for De-icing at ORD for 6 hours and they want me to pull a turn past 14hrs, forget it. It would be nice to have the option to fatigue past 14 without loosing money.
Just a few thoughts
First, I feel that reduced-rest overnights should be a contingancy rather than a plan. If an airline needs to reduce a crew's rest to operate on-schedule due to delays, so be it, but it shouldn't be planned upon and built into schedules.
Second, we should never be compelled to extend duty to 16 hours. I believe NWA's contract allows duty to be extended to 16 hrs at the pilot's descression but it is not required. If this were FAR, airlines could keep on schedule in weather without risking fatigue. If all I have done is a couple of legs and got a good La-z-boy nap in, I'll fly into the 15th or 16th hour to get to the overnight. However if I have been sitting unblocked at the gate waiting for De-icing at ORD for 6 hours and they want me to pull a turn past 14hrs, forget it. It would be nice to have the option to fatigue past 14 without loosing money.
Just a few thoughts
#24
While I agree with you to an extent SAAB, I must say that small improvments could go a long way.
First, I feel that reduced-rest overnights should be a contingancy rather than a plan. If an airline needs to reduce a crew's rest to operate on-schedule due to delays, so be it, but it shouldn't be planned upon and built into schedules.
Second, we should never be compelled to extend duty to 16 hours. I believe NWA's contract allows duty to be extended to 16 hrs at the pilot's descression but it is not required. If this were FAR, airlines could keep on schedule in weather without risking fatigue. If all I have done is a couple of legs and got a good La-z-boy nap in, I'll fly into the 15th or 16th hour to get to the overnight. However if I have been sitting unblocked at the gate waiting for De-icing at ORD for 6 hours and they want me to pull a turn past 14hrs, forget it. It would be nice to have the option to fatigue past 14 without loosing money.
Just a few thoughts
First, I feel that reduced-rest overnights should be a contingancy rather than a plan. If an airline needs to reduce a crew's rest to operate on-schedule due to delays, so be it, but it shouldn't be planned upon and built into schedules.
Second, we should never be compelled to extend duty to 16 hours. I believe NWA's contract allows duty to be extended to 16 hrs at the pilot's descression but it is not required. If this were FAR, airlines could keep on schedule in weather without risking fatigue. If all I have done is a couple of legs and got a good La-z-boy nap in, I'll fly into the 15th or 16th hour to get to the overnight. However if I have been sitting unblocked at the gate waiting for De-icing at ORD for 6 hours and they want me to pull a turn past 14hrs, forget it. It would be nice to have the option to fatigue past 14 without loosing money.
Just a few thoughts
#26
#27
#28
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: A-320
Posts: 6,929
PS I am not saying your wrong I am just saying the examples I have seen tell me differently
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Happy FO
Posts: 504
oh yea, tell that to the people who create the pairings. SWA runs there operation differently then any other airline out there, especially at the regional level. There is no way our days off would not be affected if they increased our rest. I am all for safety however days off and line values would plummet, believe me its been looked at before and the extra rest isnt worth it to most people who are polled
PS I am not saying your wrong I am just saying the examples I have seen tell me differently
PS I am not saying your wrong I am just saying the examples I have seen tell me differently
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: In the doghouse
Posts: 136
Well, Personally I think that not only is a 12 hour duty limitation invaluable, but is entirely feasible. I just did a quick examination of our lines this month, and out of the entire month only 1 pairing on 1 day was scheduled longer than 12 hours (excluding a few ready reserve schedules and stand-ups). This, by the way, is at Colgan (yes, COLGAN!) out of EWR. In fact, most of our scheduled days are less than 10 hours. If Colgan can do this, than I think others can as well. This would also have the added benefit of reducing stand-ups across the board.
I understand that this is only scheduled time, but if we can build lines to about 10 hours, extendable to say 12 or 14, it would greatly reduce the amount of fatigue from long days.
I understand that this is only scheduled time, but if we can build lines to about 10 hours, extendable to say 12 or 14, it would greatly reduce the amount of fatigue from long days.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post