|
NTSB chairman says regionals 'can't wait'
NTSB chairman says regionals 'can't wait' on new safety regulations
US National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Deborah Hersman called on US regional airlines to "take the initiative" on safety issues by going beyond "minimum requirements," particularly regarding pilot hiring/training and pilot fatigue. Delivering the keynote address to the Regional Airline Assn. Annual Convention in Milwaukee, Hersman said the February 2009 Colgan Air Q400 crash that killed 50 (ATWOnline, Feb. 4) was "a watershed event in that it brought into the harsh spotlight a number of issues that have been quietly plaguing the industry for decades." She expressed concern that regional airlines are viewed as "the farm team" where pilots gain experience before moving on to mainline carriers. "I think that this is a really bad way to look at this," she told reporters following the speech. With regionals operating 53% of US domestic flights, "the regionals are the mainline," she said, adding that pilot training, commuting and fatigue policies should be consistent across the board. She expressed skepticism that FAA adequately can enforce uniform, high-level safety standards: "We can't wait for regulations because sometimes these regulations take years or even decades to complete…I don't think FAA can always keep pace with how fast things are changing and it's up to the industry to take the bull by the horns." The NTSB chairman was criticized for commenting at the board's hearing on the Colgan crash that "it felt like the movie ‘Groundhog Day’" because the safety issues highlighted were recurring. "I took some heat for that comment, but I stand by it," she said yesterday." These are not new problems. Pilots have been commuting for decades. Colgan knew that 70% of their pilots were commuters and 20% were commuting over 1,000 miles." RAA President Roger Cohen said the organization is "dissecting all of the NTSB recommendations" related to the Colgan crash, adding that pilot training was a "major topic" during its board meeting at the conference this week. Atlantic Southeast Airlines President Brad Holt said regionals have stepped up cooperation with mainline airline partners in the aftermath of the Colgan accident. "We meet regularly with our partners [Delta Air Lines and United Airlines] on our safety programs," he told ATWOnline. "The sharing of safety information has to be open and honest. We've gotten better at having scheduled meetings, usually on a monthly basis…I really do think the word just hasn't gotten out there" on regionals' increased safety efforts over the past year. |
Originally Posted by HalinTexas
(Post 817824)
|
We wouldn't be having this issue if all branded flying is done by pilots under one seniority list under same work rules and benefits. ie., all DAL flights are flown by DAL pilots with DAL seniority list under DAL work rules and payrates.
I have to give credit to SW Airlines for nor selling out scope to regionals. All Southwest flights are flown by SW pilots, as they should be. FAA is in bed with the airline management so they are not going to change unless someone with power forces them to change. Just look at the way FAA is sitting on the crew duty and rest requirement rule change. Or the way politicians are trying to water down the minimum part 121 hiring std. They can't even agree on ATP and 1500 hour requirement for new hires. |
All they would have to do is make the Mainline partner accountable for all damages if one of their regional partners crash one. That would create instant oversight from mainline, and they would either crack down or take back the flying entirely
|
Originally Posted by Lighteningspeed
(Post 817842)
We wouldn't be having this issue if all branded flying is done by pilots under one seniority list under same work rules and benefits. ie., all DAL flights are flown by DAL pilots with DAL seniority list under DAL work rules and payrates.
I have to give credit to SW Airlines for nor selling out scope to regionals. All Southwest flights are flown by SW pilots, as they should be. FAA is in bed with the airline management so they are not going to change unless someone with power forces them to change. Just look at the way FAA is sitting on the crew duty and rest requirement rule change. Or the way politicians are trying to water down the minimum part 121 hiring std. They can't even agree on ATP and 1500 hour requirement for new hires. |
Chairperson Hersman is suggesting the RAA self-impose rules that will cost them more in the end! Ya...I'm sure "Spray-Tan" Cohen will just jump on that!!;)
The 2 agencies overseeing air travel safety never even talk to each other, unless it's under court order, so the agency head who doesn't even make the rules says pretty-please!! So it's left in the laps of the numb-nuts in congress...what a mess. Oh my God:eek:...this idiot is worked-up over regionals being farm-leagues, and the pilots not having the same qualifications and training as the majors...well...if they did, they'd be flying for the majors, now, wouldn't they? (That deserves a Bill Engvall "Here's your sign!") |
Originally Posted by Lighteningspeed
(Post 817842)
I have to give credit to SW Airlines for nor selling out scope to regionals. All Southwest flights are flown by SW pilots, as they should be.
Like I said, I haven't kept up, so are those agreements STILL in place? Or was that a possible expansion avenue for SW that basically got farmed out to foreign carriers? I know, outside the U.S. had never been a part of the way SW does business. But NEITHER was going into places like LAX, DEN, NSP, LGA, etc. |
Originally Posted by Lighteningspeed
(Post 817842)
FAA is in bed with the airline management so they are not going to change unless someone with power forces them to change. Just look at the way FAA is sitting on the crew duty and rest requirement rule change. Or the way politicians are trying to water down the minimum part 121 hiring std. They can't even agree on ATP and 1500 hour requirement for new hires.
|
Originally Posted by HalinTexas
(Post 817824)
"...With regionals operating 53% of US domestic flights, "the regionals are the mainline," she said....
How are things going to change when this type of flying is still called "regional". Let's all stop using the incorrect term first of all and call it what it is: OUTSOURCED TRANSCONTINENTAL CONTRACT FLYING How about the OTAG (Outsourced Transcontinental Airline Group) or CACA (Contract Airline Companies of America)? Mods? How about a name change to this forum? Start a trend; The Outsourced Contract Forum? The cost of safety was the very reason the outsourcing began in the first place. The airlines saw their chance at shifting flying to cheaper labor and simultaneously reducing the cost of safety through less stringent work rules and less experienced pilots. It's pure hypocrisy for the NTSB and FAA to begin focusing on the outsourced pilots while ignoring the true developers of the outsourcing model itself. winglet |
Originally Posted by winglet
(Post 817974)
How are things going to change when this type of flying is still called "regional". Let's all stop using the incorrect term first of all and call it what it is: OUTSOURCED TRANSCONTINENTAL CONTRACT FLYING How about the OTAG (Outsourced Transcontinental Airline Group) or CACA (Contract Airline Companies of America)? Mods? How about a name change to this forum? Start a trend; The Outsourced Contract Forum? I have suggested just that. Edit to clarify: I only suggested that we change the name of the forum to accurately reflect the airlines being discussed. Clearly, there's not much regional about SkyWest, for instance. And several "majors" are indeed limited to regional areas. So, I'd call it "Contracted Airlines". |
OK, now what? Talk is cheap....
|
Originally Posted by DashDriverYV
(Post 817848)
All they would have to do is make the Mainline partner accountable for all damages if one of their regional partners crash one. That would create instant oversight from mainline, and they would either crack down or take back the flying entirely
|
Originally Posted by DashDriverYV
(Post 817848)
All they would have to do is make the Mainline partner accountable for all damages if one of their regional partners crash one. That would create instant oversight from mainline, and they would either crack down or take back the flying entirely
Colgan is deemed to be representing Continental Airlines in the eyes of the flying public. Colgan flies airplanes painted with Continental colors and logos, and their flights are advertised as Continental flights to the public. Even if Continental is held not liable, the cost of defending such a massive lawsuit is extremely expensive. Mainline management is aware of it. Problem is most top management only last few years so they are only interested in short term profits and the cost of defending such a lawsuit is weighed against the savings made by farming out the mainline flying to the cheapest bidder. Continental management and their beancounters figure it still makes monetary sense to have Colgan fly those flights. In the Colgan Buffalo crash, that type of mentality has come back and bit them on their a**. Anytime a contract feeder gets into an accident from now on, the public,more than ever, will demand a thorough investigation into whether the training and experience of the flight crew met the current professional mainline standards or whether they were negligent and subpar. In the Colgan crash, there is enough evidence to make a convincing argument that there was negligence on the part of Colgan and Continental Airlines will most likely be held accountable as well, at least partially. |
The class-action lawsuit against CAL you mentioned is indeed in place, but the current mechanics of liability severely limit the potential success of that suit. While it's true that Continental has been held at least tangentially liable for 3407, they have successfully managed to deflect most of the blame toward the operator of the flight. The outcry that immediately followed 3407 regarding "name on plane/ticket" vs. actual operator has predictably died down, as public outrage is a perishable resource. It's now the status quo, and while people may still not like it, there is no legislation in place or in the works that would come close to DashDriver's elegant solution. The waters are muddy enough with rest rules, pay scales, etc. that the flying public has lost interest.
As long as the cost/benefit analysis at the highest levels of airline management still works out such that the financial benefits of outsourcing without oversight justify a Colgan crash or two, you won't see any change. |
Originally Posted by thepotato232
(Post 819354)
The class-action lawsuit against CAL you mentioned is indeed in place, but the current mechanics of liability severely limit the potential success of that suit. While it's true that Continental has been held at least tangentially liable for 3407, they have successfully managed to deflect most of the blame toward the operator of the flight. The outcry that immediately followed 3407 regarding "name on plane/ticket" vs. actual operator has predictably died down, as public outrage is a perishable resource. It's now the status quo, and while people may still not like it, there is no legislation in place or in the works that would come close to DashDriver's elegant solution. The waters are muddy enough with rest rules, pay scales, etc. that the flying public has lost interest.
As long as the cost/benefit analysis at the highest levels of airline management still works out such that the financial benefits of outsourcing without oversight justify a Colgan crash or two, you won't see any change. Our Tort and contract liability is one based on stare decisis. Meaning, as I have indicated, it can only come when a legal action such as the one against Continental prevails and sets a precedence for holding the mainline carrier liable for the actions of its contract feeder like Colgan. There have been numerous cases in the past that have held main party liable for the negligent actions of its subcontractor when that subcontractor was held out as representing the main party, such as in this case. I doubt Continental will be able to escape its share of the liability, however they maybe divided by the court. As for your second point of cost benefit analysis, I have already pointed out that was the reason for mainline carriers to sell out scope to the cheapest bidder, however, this Colgan crash will have numerous legal and regulatory consequences which will force mainline management to reassess their strategy. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:00 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands