I am looking to get some information here. I am hoping any MEC's or people within the know can shed some light on just what rule changes the FAA is proposing for the regionals. I am looking for facts from people that are in the loop so to speak. This doesnt need to be a Major vs Regional, or a "My airline against your airline" type deal. ALL of us regional pilots need to be aware that some of the rumored changes, could very well affect us and not in a positive way. We as Regional pilots need to stand up and do what we always claim we need and unify and make sure the rule change proposals, which some admittedly are looking positive, are going to be for the better. We can not ; however, let the FAA become reactionary and have "carte blanche" so to speak, without voicing our concerns about some of the proposals that may be looked at by people who do not trully have a full understanding of the industry. Some of the things that concern me are the duty times, (are they going to really change for the better or just change)? How about drastically cutting out commuting, or the latest rumor that if you failed anything past instrument (read commercial or CFI initial) ,even if you came back and hit it out of the park the second time out, and proved you are proficiant, that under strong lobbys for weeding out and identifying failures of the past, could very well end your career. I realize these are rumors and such, but mabye we can start to see the reactionary mentality that may affect all regional pilots for years to come. What I simply propose is lets all look hard at what the congress and gov are proposing and get together as pilots and put our opinions into record so the FAA and such will at least have this information from the guys that are in the trenches to consider when they make their final recomendations. If we dont at least excercise our rights as Americans, and speak up about proposed law changes (regardless of which side you fall on any one individual issue), we could very well end up with rule changes that might bite our industry later on down the road. Lets all get involved....I sincerely hope there are some out there that understand why I am asking this. Any proposals without checks and balances might lead to us getting more than we bargained for, or laws that were at the time of final approval, not what they were initially intended for. Lawa are always rewritten many times before finalization lets keep that in mind

 

I almost never post on here...but I couldn't not post this.

The FAA has a process for changing rules. One step in that process is publishing a "Notice of Proposed RuleMaking" (NPRM). There is a comment / question & answer period before any change is made.

See:

Rulemaking

 

Thank you that is a good summery of what I was trying to say, We as pilots need to state opinions regardless of which side we fall on so these laws dont go through unchecked, which will happen if the time to comment expires and no one comments. Thanks for posting that

 

Unfortunately some of this process may very well be bypassed when Congress steps in and forces the rules to be changed via laws being passed.

 

One of the rumors that was brought to a recent ASA recurrent class was the the FAA would mandate that a pilot must live with in 200 miles of their assigned domicile. Not sure how well that will "fly" with any company, or pilot for that matter. Yet it is only a rumor. I for one, won't believe it until i see it.

 

That'll be a good answer. Because even if there were guys that went by it, the pilot that wakes up at 2-3 am to drive 200 miles/3-4 hours will be completely rested and ready to for his 6-7 am show with a 10-12-14-16 hour duty day ahead of him.

 

Legally this would be impossible. There is no legal precedent for the government to control where ANYONE lives, including military personnel. While the FAA has a lot of power to regulate your professional life, they have almost no authority over your personal life (other than substance abuse). This would not pass a constitutional test in my opinion for two reasons:

1) It is arbitrarily applied to some folks, but not others.

2) There is no similar precedent that I can think of.

3) Most importantly: It does not guarantee that a pilot will be rested...the are numerous ways to become tired within 200 miles of an airport.


While nothing the FAA might try would surprise me, I'm not sure that the airlines would support something like this...they would be screwed if 30% of their pilots just decided to stay home.

It is somewhat more realistic that they might try to start your duty day when your commute blocks out, but #1 and #3 above still apply to that...forcing certain pilots to be in domicile does not guarantee that they will be rested, nor is that guy who drove 200 miles going to be rested.

But the OP has a point...make sure your union reps know that they need to represent your interests in washington. There are two avenues for change: FAA rulemaking and congress passing a law. The FAA has to follow the NPRM procedures, but congress does not. Fortunately it looks like the ball is in the FAA's court right now, so make sure you participate in the rule-making process.

 

You try pulling this type of non-commuting atmosphere at the regional level and it will reach the majors, and they will NEVER let that happen

 

What happens when an airline decides to shut one of its bases and open another one up somewhere else?

 

They could kill the CASS system and outlaw jumpseating in the cockpit. That would have a very chilling affect on jumpseating. The companies could stop jumpseating in the cabin as well and make you buy a ZED ticket on offline airlines.