121 Hiring at all with 12 Hour Duty Day?
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
There is plenty of airlines out there with contracts that have 12 hour rule already and they get 18 days off... When I worked at XJT they max scheduled day was 13.5 hrs of duty and yet we had more days off than other regionals without that provision. All this talk about reducing the days off is just managment scare tactics and you suckers are faling for it.
#32
I am stunned that there are pilots who will talk all day long about safety and then when a significant safety-related rule is about the come down from the authorities they start getting nervous about fewer days off.
The science is done. The debate is over. 16 hour workdays in a safety-critical industry are not safe.
Let the chips fall where the may regarding schedules. But this change has been a long time coming and if folks start to get weak kneed about it maybe it won't happen and we can just keep flying from 6AM until 10PM. Anyone who works on the east coast in places like PHL, LGA, EWR, JFK knows that there are plenty of these days.
This change must happen sooner rather than later.
The science is done. The debate is over. 16 hour workdays in a safety-critical industry are not safe.
Let the chips fall where the may regarding schedules. But this change has been a long time coming and if folks start to get weak kneed about it maybe it won't happen and we can just keep flying from 6AM until 10PM. Anyone who works on the east coast in places like PHL, LGA, EWR, JFK knows that there are plenty of these days.
This change must happen sooner rather than later.
#33
Pilots, Airlines Urge New Fatigue Rules - WSJ.com
By ANDY PASZTOR
Representatives of the airline industry and pilots unions agreed to an overhaul of rules aimed at combating cockpit fatigue, according to people familiar with the situation, a move that could bring sweeping changes to the way airlines run their operations.
The group urged Federal Aviation Administration chief Randy Babbitt on Wednesday to jettison decades-old regulations that set uniform limits on how many hours pilots can fly and replace them with more flexible rules based on scientific studies about what causes fatigue. The recommendations call for drafting rules that would limit each pilot's flight hours based on the time of day, the number of takeoffs, or segments, during a trip, and the internal body clocks of pilots.
The proposal envisions a sliding scale of between seven and 11 scheduled flight hours for pilots per day, compared with the current maximum of eight hours, these people said. Rules on total hours spent on duty, which aren't regulated as strictly as flight time, also would be adjusted.
If the FAA moves to implement such far-reaching changes -- which could come at the earliest by the end of next year -- it would substantially alter the workdays of many pilots. It would also likely increase personnel costs for many regional carriers, which fly shorter routes. Many commuter pilots -- who work grueling schedules that include multiple takeoffs and landings a day -- likely would have less time behind the controls than they do now.
But major carriers could save, for example, because they could schedule the same cockpit crew for a morning trip from the West Coast to the East Coast and then a return flight the same day, according to people familiar with the proposal. Rules now require a new crew on the second flight.
Mr. Babbitt has championed efforts for change in the wake of recent airliner incidents and accidents, including February's crash of a Colgan Air turboprop near Buffalo, N.Y., that killed 50 people. That accident highlighted widespread fatigue faced by commuter crews stemming from reduced rest periods and workdays lasting up to 16 hours.
Although the U.K. and other countries pioneered scientifically based pilot scheduling years ago, the U.S. has largely stuck with a one-size-fits-all rule because regulators, airlines and pilots couldn't agree on changes. But in recent years, lawmakers, federal air-accident investigators and outside safety experts have intensified their calls for a sweeping rewrite of fatigue regulations.
In spite of broad agreement on much of the package, some portions remain controversial, and the FAA ultimately will have to sort out disagreements. Some of the thorniest disputes involve cargo airlines, which contend they would be economically devastated by portions of the proposal. Some charter carriers that routinely fly at odd hours complain they would also be handicapped. These groups are pushing for a separate set of rules, according to people familiar with the talks.
Spokeswomen for the FAA and the Air Line Pilots Association declined to comment, as did a spokesman for the Air Transport Association, which represents mainline carriers. Without discussing specifics, Roger Cohen, head of the country's largest regional airline association, said his group has "total and complete commitment" to the process, and a number of regional airline chiefs participated actively in the deliberations.
Commuter pilots are bound to feel more tired than long-haul crews, according to Mr. Babbitt. "There's weight given to [the number of] takeoffs and landings," Mr. Babbitt said in an interview earlier this year, but scheduling issues "are so intertwined" that "we're obliged to address them all at once."
The same day, the FAA chief told a pilot safety conference in Washington that existing regulations "don't reflect the difference" between commuter and long-haul operations. "Not only does one size not fit all" carriers, he said, "it's absolutely unsafe to think that it can."
Even before discussion of revamped rules, large and smaller airlines stepped up efforts to develop their own fatigue-mitigation techniques and train pilots how to recognize the danger signs of sleeplessness.
Regional carriers have assumed a larger role in domestic aviation by offering their big-airline partners less costly flight crews and high productivity. New fatigue rules could erode some of those advantages because they would be required to use more pilots to cover the same flight hours. As it is, the major airlines, themselves financially strapped, are attempting to cut the rates they pay their regional partners and reduce the number of regional planes under their contracts. So tougher fatigue-mitigation regulations could end up hurting the bottom lines of regional carriers.
One highly-charged area the group of fatigue experts stayed away from involves personal commuting by airline pilots to get to work. FAA and pilot union officials have said individual aviators ought to be held accountable for reporting rested and in condition to start flying. The FAA-chartered group of experts didn't end up making any formal recommendations on this topic, according to people close to the discussions
As federal officials struggle to draft new scheduling principles -- a process a former FAA administrator once called "the third rail of aviation safety regulation" --- European regulators also are working on comprehensive revisions to fatigue-prevention measures. At the same time, international aviation safety groups are prodding other countries and carriers to update workday limits based on the latest scientific data.
—Susan Carey contributed to this article.
Write to Andy Pasztor at [email protected]
Representatives of the airline industry and pilots unions agreed to an overhaul of rules aimed at combating cockpit fatigue, according to people familiar with the situation, a move that could bring sweeping changes to the way airlines run their operations.
The group urged Federal Aviation Administration chief Randy Babbitt on Wednesday to jettison decades-old regulations that set uniform limits on how many hours pilots can fly and replace them with more flexible rules based on scientific studies about what causes fatigue. The recommendations call for drafting rules that would limit each pilot's flight hours based on the time of day, the number of takeoffs, or segments, during a trip, and the internal body clocks of pilots.
The proposal envisions a sliding scale of between seven and 11 scheduled flight hours for pilots per day, compared with the current maximum of eight hours, these people said. Rules on total hours spent on duty, which aren't regulated as strictly as flight time, also would be adjusted.
If the FAA moves to implement such far-reaching changes -- which could come at the earliest by the end of next year -- it would substantially alter the workdays of many pilots. It would also likely increase personnel costs for many regional carriers, which fly shorter routes. Many commuter pilots -- who work grueling schedules that include multiple takeoffs and landings a day -- likely would have less time behind the controls than they do now.
But major carriers could save, for example, because they could schedule the same cockpit crew for a morning trip from the West Coast to the East Coast and then a return flight the same day, according to people familiar with the proposal. Rules now require a new crew on the second flight.
Mr. Babbitt has championed efforts for change in the wake of recent airliner incidents and accidents, including February's crash of a Colgan Air turboprop near Buffalo, N.Y., that killed 50 people. That accident highlighted widespread fatigue faced by commuter crews stemming from reduced rest periods and workdays lasting up to 16 hours.
Although the U.K. and other countries pioneered scientifically based pilot scheduling years ago, the U.S. has largely stuck with a one-size-fits-all rule because regulators, airlines and pilots couldn't agree on changes. But in recent years, lawmakers, federal air-accident investigators and outside safety experts have intensified their calls for a sweeping rewrite of fatigue regulations.
In spite of broad agreement on much of the package, some portions remain controversial, and the FAA ultimately will have to sort out disagreements. Some of the thorniest disputes involve cargo airlines, which contend they would be economically devastated by portions of the proposal. Some charter carriers that routinely fly at odd hours complain they would also be handicapped. These groups are pushing for a separate set of rules, according to people familiar with the talks.
Spokeswomen for the FAA and the Air Line Pilots Association declined to comment, as did a spokesman for the Air Transport Association, which represents mainline carriers. Without discussing specifics, Roger Cohen, head of the country's largest regional airline association, said his group has "total and complete commitment" to the process, and a number of regional airline chiefs participated actively in the deliberations.
Commuter pilots are bound to feel more tired than long-haul crews, according to Mr. Babbitt. "There's weight given to [the number of] takeoffs and landings," Mr. Babbitt said in an interview earlier this year, but scheduling issues "are so intertwined" that "we're obliged to address them all at once."
The same day, the FAA chief told a pilot safety conference in Washington that existing regulations "don't reflect the difference" between commuter and long-haul operations. "Not only does one size not fit all" carriers, he said, "it's absolutely unsafe to think that it can."
Even before discussion of revamped rules, large and smaller airlines stepped up efforts to develop their own fatigue-mitigation techniques and train pilots how to recognize the danger signs of sleeplessness.
Regional carriers have assumed a larger role in domestic aviation by offering their big-airline partners less costly flight crews and high productivity. New fatigue rules could erode some of those advantages because they would be required to use more pilots to cover the same flight hours. As it is, the major airlines, themselves financially strapped, are attempting to cut the rates they pay their regional partners and reduce the number of regional planes under their contracts. So tougher fatigue-mitigation regulations could end up hurting the bottom lines of regional carriers.
One highly-charged area the group of fatigue experts stayed away from involves personal commuting by airline pilots to get to work. FAA and pilot union officials have said individual aviators ought to be held accountable for reporting rested and in condition to start flying. The FAA-chartered group of experts didn't end up making any formal recommendations on this topic, according to people close to the discussions
As federal officials struggle to draft new scheduling principles -- a process a former FAA administrator once called "the third rail of aviation safety regulation" --- European regulators also are working on comprehensive revisions to fatigue-prevention measures. At the same time, international aviation safety groups are prodding other countries and carriers to update workday limits based on the latest scientific data.
—Susan Carey contributed to this article.
Write to Andy Pasztor at [email protected]
#35
Banned
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,929
Likes: 0
From: A-320
Don't any of you know people who work for major airlines? Most majors are 12-13 max duty. They fly during the same banks regionals do. They don't all have 10 days off. This is just a scare tactic by the senior guys who fear losing their 18-20 day off schedules (this fear is actually true, most lines will be 14-16 off).
One gigantic differance, their segments are a lot longer..........
EWR-BTV-CLE-BWI-EWR
Not much flight time but could be a very long duty day
#36
I am stunned that there are pilots who will talk all day long about safety and then when a significant safety-related rule is about the come down from the authorities they start getting nervous about fewer days off.
The science is done. The debate is over. 16 hour workdays in a safety-critical industry are not safe.
Let the chips fall where the may regarding schedules. But this change has been a long time coming and if folks start to get weak kneed about it maybe it won't happen and we can just keep flying from 6AM until 10PM. Anyone who works on the east coast in places like PHL, LGA, EWR, JFK knows that there are plenty of these days.
This change must happen sooner rather than later.
The science is done. The debate is over. 16 hour workdays in a safety-critical industry are not safe.
Let the chips fall where the may regarding schedules. But this change has been a long time coming and if folks start to get weak kneed about it maybe it won't happen and we can just keep flying from 6AM until 10PM. Anyone who works on the east coast in places like PHL, LGA, EWR, JFK knows that there are plenty of these days.
This change must happen sooner rather than later.
Remember, our first priority is safety. We have real actual people sitting behind us when we're flying: women, children, grandmas, grandpas, fathers, sons, daughters, mothers, the works. Would any one of you be comfortable looking any one of them in the eye and saying "Well ma'am, we could have brought our maximum duty days to 12 hours and made it less probable that you'll die in a fiery crash, but we decided that we like our days off better"?
Me personally, I'd feel like a dirtbag for that. It's extremely selfish, hypocritical, and shows disregard for the one thing we say we hold as our #1 goal: that is, keeping the flying public safe.
So, ask yourselves this: Do you actually care about safety, or do you just say you do? Here's where we can tell the difference.
#37
Exactly. I don't think half of the people screaming about days off have actually worked a 16 hour duty day with 8 hours of flying. I've done it plenty, and it's not safe.
Remember, our first priority is safety. We have real actual people sitting behind us when we're flying: women, children, grandmas, grandpas, fathers, sons, daughters, mothers, the works. Would any one of you be comfortable looking any one of them in the eye and saying "Well ma'am, we could have brought our maximum duty days to 12 hours and made it less probable that you'll die in a fiery crash, but we decided that we like our days off better"?
Me personally, I'd feel like a dirtbag for that. It's extremely selfish, hypocritical, and shows disregard for the one thing we say we hold as our #1 goal: that is, keeping the flying public safe.
So, ask yourselves this: Do you actually care about safety, or do you just say you do? Here's where we can tell the difference.
Remember, our first priority is safety. We have real actual people sitting behind us when we're flying: women, children, grandmas, grandpas, fathers, sons, daughters, mothers, the works. Would any one of you be comfortable looking any one of them in the eye and saying "Well ma'am, we could have brought our maximum duty days to 12 hours and made it less probable that you'll die in a fiery crash, but we decided that we like our days off better"?
Me personally, I'd feel like a dirtbag for that. It's extremely selfish, hypocritical, and shows disregard for the one thing we say we hold as our #1 goal: that is, keeping the flying public safe.
So, ask yourselves this: Do you actually care about safety, or do you just say you do? Here's where we can tell the difference.
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
From: http://rahcontractnow.org/
I can’t believe what I read on here sometimes. These selfish individuals worry more about day’s off than killing a full load of passengers in the back. There lack of regard for safety is pathetic. I would be willing to bet it’s the real senior guys who also sell out the junior guys when negotiating for a TA… it’s just the same mentality.
As someone mentioned earlier, many majors already have it in there contract that 12 hours is the max. Obviously there days off are not affected by this so quit giving us this law of unintended consequences crap and start thinking like a professional.
As someone mentioned earlier, many majors already have it in there contract that 12 hours is the max. Obviously there days off are not affected by this so quit giving us this law of unintended consequences crap and start thinking like a professional.
#39
Prime Minister/Moderator

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,127
Likes: 796
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
I can’t believe what I read on here sometimes. These selfish individuals worry more about day’s off than killing a full load of passengers in the back. There lack of regard for safety is pathetic. I would be willing to bet it’s the real senior guys who also sell out the junior guys when negotiating for a TA… it’s just the same mentality.
For many of us, days off is the only justification left for this career. When I'm at work I'm gone...I need more days off than a nine-to-fiver to balance that out. For me it's about 15 days off to barely break even. Anything less than that and this job is QOL-negative. Eighteen is what I prefer.
This is a very, very important issue and is unrelated to safety. The concern that people have is that the FAA will mandate changes which will affect airline economics...especially regionals. It is particularly bad for regionals because they are stuck with their income level and can't change it until the next round of feed contracts.
Majors at least can raise ticket prices, and since all majors will be impacted the same it should not be a competitive issue.
But the regionals are stuck, and they will do what they always do when backed into a corner...take it out on labor. I think the frustration is that the government is changing the rules but not making any allowance for the impact on us. If I were to be limited to 12 days off, I would quit...unless the company eliminated all overnight trips and did only locals so I could be home each night.
What if you told a nine-to-fiver that he was going to have to spend 72 additional hours at work each month, unpaid. He would laugh in your face...
Major schedules are different, so obviously this will not affect them much. Even some of the better regionals rarely go over 12 hours. I suspect the bottom-feeders will get hit hardest...they will take everyone down to min days off and still have to hire.
#40
Just to clear up what I was saying, I am fine with a system that has a mix of days off. To, me that is what is nice about the system. If you want to make money, upgrade at first opportunity, if you want QOL stay in your seat. There are more benefits regarding those choices when you are at an airline that has a mixed fleet and mixed types of flying.
I am not sure what it is now, but AirTran had a very average days off spread through the bid pack. To me, it was ok for the junior guy, but if you were senior, it wasn't great because you really didn't get anything. Defeats the QOL of life debate, thus forcing you to upgrade to get something, ie a higher pay rate.
I am not sure that a max duty rule change will be bad. First, as has been mentioned, safety is job one, regardless of what is in the back of the airplane, peeps or boxes. We are a 121 Supplemental Airlines, switching next year to being a 121 Flag Domestic/International. My point is that under 121 Supplemental, things are a lot more relaxed than Flag. Our contract however makes us look like a 121 Flag airline. For example, we have a duty max of 13 hours during from 5AM-4PM, then it switches from 4PM-Midnight to a 11.5 max and between 1AM-5AM we have a max of 9 hours. Our Duty max can be extended an hour and a half for operational reasons and then of course, we can go up to the FAR 16 max. I have never gone to the FAR limit, but have hit the operational extensions a few times. All of the above is for Domestic, International has different rules.
SWA has AM or PM flying, they don't fly all day. My point in all of this is that it comes down to rigs or productivity. Each airline and pilot group will have to figure out what works for them. As mentioned, COEX had duty limits also, so it can be done.
I am not sure what it is now, but AirTran had a very average days off spread through the bid pack. To me, it was ok for the junior guy, but if you were senior, it wasn't great because you really didn't get anything. Defeats the QOL of life debate, thus forcing you to upgrade to get something, ie a higher pay rate.
I am not sure that a max duty rule change will be bad. First, as has been mentioned, safety is job one, regardless of what is in the back of the airplane, peeps or boxes. We are a 121 Supplemental Airlines, switching next year to being a 121 Flag Domestic/International. My point is that under 121 Supplemental, things are a lot more relaxed than Flag. Our contract however makes us look like a 121 Flag airline. For example, we have a duty max of 13 hours during from 5AM-4PM, then it switches from 4PM-Midnight to a 11.5 max and between 1AM-5AM we have a max of 9 hours. Our Duty max can be extended an hour and a half for operational reasons and then of course, we can go up to the FAR 16 max. I have never gone to the FAR limit, but have hit the operational extensions a few times. All of the above is for Domestic, International has different rules.
SWA has AM or PM flying, they don't fly all day. My point in all of this is that it comes down to rigs or productivity. Each airline and pilot group will have to figure out what works for them. As mentioned, COEX had duty limits also, so it can be done.
Last edited by OKLATEX; 09-10-2009 at 12:46 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
JetJock16
Regional
63
04-08-2016 05:05 PM



