"Remember 3407" Airline Labor Reform Act
 

POST FROM ANOTHER SITE

Okay, I've had more than enough.

It's plainly clear to me that we, as aviation professionals, as Americans, as human beings, are under attack. We're being beaten down into plow horses, mules, and hapless indentured servants.

ENOUGH!

I hereby propose that collectively, both here on JetCareers, in our own personal lives, at our places of business, and through our Unions, we begin the process of CHANGE.

We have had endless rhetoric and conjecture on what should be done about the nature of our business. But what HAS been done?

It seems nearly always that things end with "but what can we do.. none of us know how to do this sort of thing..."

So?

Ladies and Gentlemen, at times such as these, it is important that we not look at the Herculean task before us and falsely assume we must each untake the task all in our own selves.

Reinventing the wheel or martyring one's self to the 'cause' of a better standard of living is NOT what we need.

What we need is something very many of us already do very well: a cool, calm assessment of the situation at hand, the tools we readily have available, and the will to act confidently and decisively.

It's time.

In today's political atmosphere of Change, more possibility exists to conceive the differences needed in order to make this a better world for all of us. What will all the rhetoric do from last fall if we simply let the sound of the trumpets fade when the moment when we must DARE TO BE GREAT go UNANSWERED!

I, along with any one else willing to do so, will endeavor the following:

1. I will draft letters to my elected officials expressing my deep concern over the present state of Airline Labor law and how I think it should be changed.
(I will, over the next several days, attempt to provide form letters for the less-inclined to writing.)

2. I will make it a clear point to understand the current rest standards, regulations, and procedures at my present employer. I will not allow them to violate them, and will clearly explain them to anyone who wishes to understand them.

3. I will tell other aviation professionals about this movement. I will attempt, patiently and diplomatically, to demonstrate the need for reform and to engender a sense of unity and to enlist the aid of both the young and enthusiastic and the old and experienced hands.

4. I will demand action from public officials on this subject.

5. If necessary, I will attempt to write to news media outlets to clearly, rationally, professionally explain their lack of understanding of Airline procedures and the real-world scenarios at hand.

6. I WILL NOT QUIT. I will not roll over in bed tomorrow morning and forget what I have stated that I will do today. I will understand that the commitment I make today is one that will shape and change not only my personal future, but the future of the industry, and the world around us as well.

I will not tire. I will not falter, I will not waiver.


The fallen of Colgan Air flight 3407 have made it clear- our lives truly are at stake every time we take to the skies to earn our living. If we do not take proper precaution, we may well find ourselves in a situation in which our very best is demanded in order to reach a safe outcome. In order to LIVE.

While the exact cause of the crash of Colgan Air 3407 has not yet been determined, and much has been said in speculation, the lacking nature of our work rules and legislation governing this industry has never been more clear.

It has been said that the rules and regulations which govern our operations and were put in place to ensure our safety have been written in the blood of those who died before their inception. Given this, it is clear that the crew and passengers of Colgan Air 3407 have once again filled that sacred ink well of change. It is time to solemnly, seriously, and decisively pick up that quill of remembrance and dip it into the last remains of those who paid the ultimate price for our lack of vision.

It is time to craft a new vision for a future in which no person, regardless of their understanding or background, should hestitate to set foot along with their family aboard an airliner in this country.

It is time.

(CONTINUED)

Here's the letter I just sent.
I borrowed a few things from EL (thanks) and I'm posting it here in case anyone is too lazy to write their own. Have at it. Just send something.

https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

http://commerce.senate.gov/public/in...e-c5affb405db5

I'm also writing one for my non-flying friends to send... I'll post that one later.

To:
Jack Reed
Jim Langevin
Sheldon Whitehouse

Dear X,

I urge you to lead the way to a safer air transportation system.

As you and the public are aware the NTSB is holding hearings this week over the tragic crash of Colgan flight 3407. While the sensational findings may be startling to the general public, many of the facts being uncovered in this hearing do not come as a surprise to those of us in commercial aviation careers.

The straw that broke the camel's back.

When something tragic like this happens - there are always many small factors involved that ultimately lead to the accident. However, while it is important to establish which straw broke the camel's back it is just as important to question why the camel was over-loaded in the first place.

Legal versus Prudent.

Professional air-crews are the last line of defense in any emergency - while it is currently legal to push them to their limits, is it prudent? There are a great many outdated FAA regulations governing aircrew scheduling and rest requirements - for the most part companies, and pilots who fly for these companies, follow these regulations to remain legal. The fact that air-crews are considered legal to perform their duties doesn't necessarily mean it is prudent for them to do so. The long duty-days that lead to short overnight rest periods were intended, I believe, to be the exception rather the rule. Companies regularly schedule in minimum and reduced rest - a tool that was intended to be a contingency for weather or maintenance delays.


Is meeting the minimums enough?


Regulations, by their very nature, are intended to establish a base or foundation to which businesses should operate at or above. While companies are free to exceed the minimum regulations, we've seen (in all industries) that few rarely do. When incidents occur, companies are quick to respond that no laws were violated. After all, the airlines are simply operating their businesses within the parameters set by the FAA. It is clear that the airlines are very good at following FAA regulations - however outdated the are. This is why the laws must change.


What is the price of safety?

It is truly a shame that a market value needs to be placed on public safety. But that's precisely what happens every time strides are made towards updating old FAA regulations. It's just business. It's business doing more with less – getting more out of their employees, more profit, less cost. Everyone knows it's about money, and that's okay as long as no one gets hurt. The ATA and other lobby groups argue how stricter regulations would kill the airline industry. A few more of these crashes could do just that. This is why the laws must change.

Very few businesses would voluntarily hamstring themselves to operate in the best interest of public safety but if ALL of the airlines were mandated by law to comply with new FAA scheduling and rest requirements then none would be disadvantaged in the market place. This is why the laws must change.

While the exact cause of the crash of Colgan flight 3407 has not yet been determined, the nature of our work rules and legislation governing this industry has never been more clear.

It has been said that the rules and regulations which govern our airline operations were put in place to ensure our safety, and have been written in the blood of those who died before their inception. Given this, it is clear that the crew and passengers of Colgan 3407 have once again filled that sacred ink well of change. It is time to solemnly, seriously, and decisively pick up that quill of remembrance and dip it into the last remains of those who paid the ultimate price for our lack of vision.

It is time to craft a new vision for a future in which no person, regardless of their understanding or background, should hesitate to set foot along with their family aboard an airliner in this country. It is time. The flying public deserves this, professional air-crews deserve this, won't you please take the lead on this important safety issue?


Sincerely, Respectfully,
X

http://commerce.senate.gov/public/in...e-c5affb405db5

Contact these guys especially.

They each have their own personal pages too. Makes it easier.

U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation

Oops sorry those links were broken.

I hear ya
 

ok my original post was stupid......I'll write a letter thanks for your help

Excellent. I wrote and encouraged all of my pilot friends to as well. Good job.

I'd love to change the world...
but I don't know what to do...
so I'll leave it up to you.

Isn't that the way it always is?

I can get behind this.

Written.

Here is an official email [email protected]

I'm going to write a letter now.
Thanks for the links provided.

Excellent idea and a very well written letter. I'm mailing mine tomorrow.

So I'm lazy, and didn't write my own letter. However, I did use your formatted letter. I sent it to every senator on the list that you provided. Hopefully, this does bring about some actual change to the aviation industry.

I am unclear on the changes sought in this 'new movement'. It seems fatigue is being addressed. Being that, I am missing it. The movement is full of emotion but seemingly little else. Yes, the purpose of running an airline business is to make a profit. And to put Colgan's name on this movement is confusing at best. There is no clearer case of pilot error bringing down an airplane that what happened in Buffalo that night. Pilots want to rush now to deflect attention to aircrews due to hearings. But best thing a professional aircrew can do is take this pill and accept responsiblity.

Noble Effort that May Make it Worse
 

Da Magic:

While your effort is noble and your letter eloquent, consider what outcome may result--perhaps opposite of what you intended.

I think your intent is to (somehow) legally force airlines to increase pay, which would (hopefully) reduce the number of commuters/jumpseaters, as they could then afford to live in lovely domiciles such as Newark. Or, give those who commute more days off to accomodate their commute.

And your argument is that commuting results in crews showing-up at the last minute, or sleeping illegally in the crew lounge, which could lead to an accident.

In an economic doldrum like this, I think it unlikely that Congress would force private enterprise to raise wages for "professionals." Oh, they'll raise minimum wage, which sounds good on paper. But the real result is that if wages go up, the employer keeps his payroll expenses even by laying-off more workers. The ones that kept their jobs got a raise--the rest lost theirs. Similar in this industry.

But I could see them enacting FARs that would require pilots to report to the crew desk the actual time they arrived from jumpseating, and there would be rest minimums; they couldn't call you out until the time had elapsed. They might go so far as to require you to provide a verifiable address to prove where you stay(ed). Violations would be hefty fines or loss of license.

It might force you to commute two days before a trip or reserve cycle.

And, if you're like me, that would mean I would be home perhaps ONE to THREE days a month, as my schedule is likely to be mostly two and three-day breaks in reserve duty.

No one would stand for that, so the airlines would have to build a second set of scheduling rules for commuters. They would have longer breaks in their schedules, and as such, might not get as many work days or hours. ALPA would have to negotiate the new guarantees for commuters--which I could see as being as low as 15 working days a month and 45 hours.

Which means they would be poorly-paid, again.

I have a heinous commute. I don't have faith in the industry to sell my house and move...and houses aren't selling, anyway. Hell, I've been assigned 4 domiciles in the last 10 years. I commuted in good faith, and have always made it. I always got a good night's sleep when I got to my domicile, too. And I would not have hesitated to call in fatigued or sick if it just didn't work.

I will write my letter to ask for protections against reprisal for those who commute, due to the poor wages, and the fear of recrimination if they do call in tired. I will suggest that airlines acknowledge that in some domiciles, a full 50% of all pilots commute (example: SFO for UAL), and the company cannot make them use up a day-off to guarantee compliance with a new FAR. Rather, they will have accept the possible loss of a reserve/line-holder due to the nature of the business, when a pilot tries to commute in good-faith but can't get on the flights. This might require tracking of CASS (and modification thereof) to show when a commuter actually did commute, or attempted to, but didn't get on.

We need to be careful what we ask for. Without commuters, this industry will collapse. We just need to protect them so they get adequate rest.

Any merit in this idea?
 

There may be a way to obtain the government's help in improving safety without yielding them operational control of our wages and working conditions: tax breaks. Unions and management negotiate the improvements needed and the IRS allows some kind of deduction or credit for provable increased costs. This method is often used when the feds want to encourage a certain kind of behavior but don't want to get into the details of running the program. Among the issues to be addressed here would be how this would motivate a company which already has no tax liability, who would certify that the "improvements" are not bogus, etc. but it might be worth thinking about.

I am not sure the details but did that captain commute? And was he not off for a few days before this accident?

Just because you have a 22 hour overnight does that mean you are sleeping for 20 hours.

Lets not lose all of our own self accountability over these topics such as getting some sleep at night.

I commute and I am yet to have any accidents as a result of my choice to live out west where I am happier.

Here’s the airlines’ spin on terms and conditions. All employees knew the pay and benefits schedules when interviewing. Base assignments are usually known during initial training. During basic indoctrination, the instructor pointed out that the use crew room as a rest area prohibited. Instructors warned about the evils of long distance commutes. The subject of crash pads came up during training.

It is equally clear that the airlines have to create in a benefit package for hotel accommodations so crews won’t have to commute cross country all night and strap the jet to their backs and work another 12 hours. And yes… starting wages need to be increased. But equally it is the responsibility for the airman to walk away from substandard conditions without reserve. New entrants to the airline business need to quit clicking their heels three times in the hopes that any employer is going to be altruistic and provide a livable wage on their own. Remember… airplanes don’t fly by themselves.

I agree with you that we must be careful and clearly define our goals in this effort. That is why I am more disappointed right now in ALPA and what should be huge opportunity to address long standing issues of substandard pay, fatigue, unrealistic scheduling, and the fraud that the mainline carriers conduct through their proxy regionals. These should be carefully addressed and planned, but ALPA so far has been silent. We only have a week or so for this to be news before the public and the politicians move on to something else. Ir it is not accelerated and marketed now, we will miss the opportunity.

However, I strongly disagree with you on simply calling this pilot error. Why must we assume that every pilot that bends an airplane is an incompetent, and fool. It is clear to me that their were some other serious mitigating conditions here, specifically fatigue. Are you Newark based, or at any of the New York airports? Do you have any idea what that operation is like, and how it can break one down physically and mentally? Look at the slow response in the animation, I beleive that these two were seriously fatigued. And as far as converation below 10,000 feet... there have been times that I've conducted conversations on late flights, just to keep alert. There are some serious structural problems in this industry. What I absolutely hate, is there are lot of people who use these situations to fan their own egos!

Onfinal

Onfinal, I agree with your first paragraph, we(Pilot Unions) have a window of opportunity that we need to press for improvements in our industry.
However, we can't have it both ways,if we want to be paid like professionals we have to constantly act and perform like professionals. In our industry fatigue will happen and then we rely on training and experience.I have never flown at a regional but I bet they train to the same standards as a major,and I bet they train approach to a stall(stick shaker) the same way. This pilot had not 1 but 2 chances to recover and messed up both of them ! I'm sorry but that is pilot error pure and simple.He wasn't trained that way but for some unknown reason he reacted that way and gave all professional pilots a black eye. He also brought bias against all the Regional pilots who are very professional and doing a great job day in and day out under less than ideal conditions.We also have to police ourselves to make sure that consistent sub-standard performers seek another profession,harsh but in an industry where mistakes are often fatal I can see no other way.I'm ready for the darts. Finis

No need for the darts!

I agree definitely pilot error. What I was trying to say, is that its not just good enough to make the Pilot Error call. Perhaps "Fatigue Induced Pilot Error"? Whatever the case, you and I know, there is likely more to this than simply a guy that was so incompetent that he augered an aircraft into the ground. The media and the public may not know better, but we certainly do!

We have got to deal with some of these issues that have grown up like weeds, before they choke the entire industy. Renslow and Shaw, God be with them, perhaps albeit tragicly have provided the catalyst.

I'm behind you 100% Da Magic as well as everyone else sending their letters! Let's do this let's get back to the pre-9/11 pay where pilots got paid for their education and experience not because they are a body filling a seat! I am just about to reach my ATP mins but would not have a problem waiting until 2000-2500 hours before getting hired as a First Officer at a regional if it meant that we all would be getting paid what we deserve as well as getting the required rest the we NEED! Let's make our voices be heard and stop letting the public, the media, and most of all the CEO's say that we are only going to be paid $16,000 - $25,000 and have to live with our parents and other relatives while doing it. Let's make the change!!!

I think the issue of the commuter thing is missing the point. For credibility sakes I have been a commuter for two years and on most occasions I chose to commute in on the day of my trip. I show of for work rested and ready to go. The issue of fatigue doesnt just appear on day one of a trip. What kills me is the 13h59 duty day with an overnight that is considered normal rest by 1 min. That is next followed by a reduced rest overnight the following day, to which I fly all day on the last day, and am given compensatory rest on my day off. This fatigue issue is not isolated to commuters and day 1. If this had happened on day 2 of a trip, commuting would not even be a discussed issue. As far as the union thing and segregating certain members, I dont believe the company has the legal authority to infiltrate a contract affecting only a partial group of pilots if the representing union doesnt agree to it, so as long as alpa doesnt cave we would all be protected.

Be careful here folks...

Congress can legislate rest requirements, but they are not going to legislate pay or guarantee you 15+ days off each month.

If we get limited to say 6 flight hours/10 duty hours each day with 12+ hour overnights we will still need to fly 80 hours/month.

Even if congress requires two days off between trips (instead of 24 hours) you could still end up on the road 5 days per week in order to get your block time.

Poorly executed, this sort of campaign could adversely impact the character of this profession and our lifestyles.

I think the bigger issue than just our paychecks is the constant under-cutting in the industry which causes carriers to cut corners on pay, maintenance, safety, etc all to save a buck and stay in business. A free market economy is great, but not in our industry when it forces companies to reduce safety to make a profit. Safety in our industry comes at a high dollar amount, and when an airline has to spend money to raise the level of safety it doesnt always happen. The Aviation Subcommittee is holding a hearing next month on the issues affecting regional carriers, here are the members:

U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation

Instead of single items to fix like duty limits or pay, let's try and push to level the playing field between pilots and management. I suggest overhauling the RLA and let unions at the various airlines dictate what our pay should be.

The only single fix I can come up with is to require all carriers to fly their own planes. Much like what jetblue does. Contract carriers underbidding each other, IMO, created much of what brought this industry down in recent years.

While back in training last week, our ALPA negotiating chairman told our group that the Delta MEC is working with the MEC's from all the DCI's to create specific criteria that a contract must have in order to bid for, let alone fly any of delta's flying. I think this is a huge step in the right direction, If you can force big daddy to end the whipsaw then that practice dies right there.

The solution here is simple. They deregulated the airline industry back in 78, but left the labor unions crippled under the requirments of the RLA. Do one of two things.

1 Reregulate the industry, partially, to infuse stability

OR

2 Remove us from the RLA and let our unions bargain real contracts,
under regular labor laws.... can you say minimum wage for all duty hours
plus your flight pay, plus your per diem.... then 1 hour extra pay per
week minimum for doing your manual and jep updates... and 1/2 hour pay
per day for care and maint of the uniform...

Think it can't happen.... it already has, in other professions... places that required employees to do job related tasks on their own time are now paying
them extra to do it... if we fell under standard labor laws, this would be a good job again in fairly short order.

Didn't work so well for AMR with the planes leased to TSA.... that just came back, with AD's not complied with, parts timed out, MEL misapplied, and repairs doen incorrectly. It should be a lesson to ANY mainline carrier that is considering subcontracting...

AMR is only now realizing how much more liability they exposed themselves to with a subcontractor, than with their in-house.

Hapless indentured servants, huh?

You hyperbole much?

For the love of God man, if you aren't happy with your employment situation you are free to take your services elsewhere.

Having flown for a regional I understand where you are coming from, but cut out the dramatic nonsense...if you're tolerating 'indentured servitude' without finding alternate employment then maybe you have a bad case of Stockholm Syndrome...

I think maybe I wasnt clear in my post but I will try to sum it up. Basically what the MEC of DAL is trying to is to create a standard for who is able to bid for flying (ie. 9E, XJ, OO, etc) It would all boil down to minimum requirements of the CBA for a regional airline. For example, minimum contract requires first year pay of $30 and hour. If you current CBA doesnt meet that requirment, you will not be allowed to bid on any flying that DAL has put out. What that would do is prevent Mesa from coming in, opening a base is MSP and then undercutting the other carriers who meet these standards. Maybe that is what AMR did, I honestly didnt follow them, maybe this is more clear, or maybe this is what you interpreted anyway.

I asked a senior ALPA guy (from FDX) this exact question several years ago.
His explanation was that since RLA has some benefits for both sides, neither ALPA nor ATA wants to open that can of worms...with congress involved, nobody knows what they might end up with.

Not saying that's the right answer, but that appears to be the mentality of the leadership....let sleeping dogs lie.

Asking for trouble
 

That's a valid concern -- just consider the unintended consequences of airline deregulation. I'm reminded of a "Three Stooges" episode where the hapless homeowner asks Curley, Larry, and Moe to fix a simple plumbing leak. :eek:

Isn't that the same episode where Larry is pulling a ton of wires through some pipes? They were in a mansion where the owner was hosting some sort of a party if my memory serves me correctly.