Rest rules
 

Glendale: FAA Press Release Update

Too costly for cargo if I skimmed it correctly.

1 The projected cost for all-cargo operations is $306 million ($214 million present value at 7% and $252
million at 3%). The projected benefit of avoiding one fatal all-cargo accident ranges between $20.35
million and $32.55 million, depending on the number of crewmembers on board the aircraft.

Found this nugget on page 13

The final rule has been sent to the Federal Register for display and publication. It is currently available at:
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...-FinalRule.pdf, and will take effect in two years to allow commercial passenger airline operators time to transition.

Keep taking it in the shorts.

Make sure you get your free pizza in SDF tonight. I am sure with the pizza, you will get a big smile from your friendly ACP.

fully gutted and look at the HUGE loop hole at the bottom about the airlines developing their own programs... WOW, Good job ATA/Fedex/UPS.. you beat us hands down!

WE LOST.

I look at it as we got outspent, and in DC, money talks!

Now, let's see how the numb-n*ts that voted for the FDX foreign domicile spin this.... We got an effective 6% raise but gave up our only bargaining chip in the last 10 years and possibly for the next 10.

Also, now that the rest rules are published, I'd expect all sections "possibly affected" by them to be signed, sealed and delivered to the membership in less than 6 months.

Ah.... so you see folly in that expectation, you say????

Anyone that thinks that the company, with nothing to gain (they already have ALPA permission to open a domicile just about anywhere in Western Europe....) and higher wages or costs looking them in the face with a new contract, will negotiate honestly is just as ignorant as those that voted for the Foreign Domicile codicil.

In negotiations, you are in a business deal. The first one that blinks, loses. We blinked...

Right up until an all crago airplane lands on top of an A380 full of people. But hey the pax crew was well rested. Awesome. :eek:

And the real joke is there are only recommendations for commuting. The passenger guys get their cake and get to eat it too. They get to show up as tired as they want after a commute (not recommended by the rule, but hey...) and then get better rest rules after show time! And the cargo guys got nada (and at FedEx, still have some commute duty period restrictions in the contract!)

AGAIN :mad:

feels like a real kick in the pants!

"One level of Safety" unless you're a delivery boy! what a load!

maybe one day the FAA will REGULATE the industry.

Total bullcrap, I guess the lives of Cargo pilots/Engineers/FME's are not worth as much as pax carrying crews.....BS I say.

It never was about protecting the crews ...

only the potential loss of passenger life

And yet, the vast majority of guys I fly with vote Republican. How much more will it take for pilots to realize that the Republican party and in this case, the Republican-controlled House, will say anything to the public but will always vote in support of business leaders. Go ahead and be unhappy with the President as a person but realize that the Democratic Party's platform supports workers rights and workers benefits and guess what? Pilots are workers.

Some of us will never understand that you will only get what you pay for with any of them. The "platform" has proven to be rather flimsy over the last sixty years. One can only laugh at the naive.:D

I hate to say it, but we lost this in the OMB, which is controlled by the White House. The lobbyists ware able to get the change during the budgeting process. The OMB's purview is to cost out rules/laws, not change them. This whole thing is totally corrupt, regardless of party. Follow the money....

American Airlines Resuming Service After Clinton Stops Strike - NYTimes.com

Yeah, Democrats have undoubtedly been in support of workers' rights and benefits. :rolleyes:

"Every pilot has a personal responsibility to arrive at work fit for duty," said FAA Acting Administrator Michael Huerta. "This new rule gives pilots enough time to get the rest they really need to safely get passengers to their destinations."

Development of the rules pitted the pilots, who advocated greater rest for safety, against the airlines, which argued that limiting flight times will raise costs.

FAA estimated the rule would cost airlines nearly $300 million a year. But Airlines for America, a trade group representing airlines, estimated it could cost $2 billion more each year.

Another dispute in development of the rules was whether to apply the same rules to cargo pilots as the pilots of commercial airliners. The FAA decided not to apply to rules to cargo pilots because of the costs to that industry, Huerta said.

LaHood said he would invite cargo executives to his office in 2012 and urge them to voluntarily to adopt the rule.

"It was tough to implement it on cargo because of the cost-benefit to this," LaHood said.

The package-delivery company UPS argued in comments to the FAA against the same standards because cargo pilots fly mostly at night and carry fewer people. The company's 2,600 pilots have gotten used to flying at night and sleeping by day, so limiting consecutive overnight flights would disrupt them. The company warned that night-time restrictions would require them to hire more pilots and install sleeping facilities on some planes.

Robert Travis, president of the Independent Pilots Association for UPS pilots, blasted the exemption for cargo pilots.

"Giving air cargo carriers the choice to opt-in to new pilot rest rules makes a much sense as allowing truckers to 'opt-out' of drunk driving laws," Travis said. "To potentially allow fatigued cargo pilots to share the same skies with properly rested passenger pilots creates an unnecessary threat to public safety."

The National Transportation Safety Board has urged safety enhancements to reduce pilot fatigue for decades. While the board didn't blame fatigue as a cause in the Colgan crash near Buffalo, the board found that neither pilot appeared to have slept in a bed the night before.

Relatives of the victims lobbied Congress for better schedules to give pilots rest. The relatives also urged FAA to complete the rules that were due Aug. 1, but were delayed with review by the White House Office of Management and Budget.

Now let's see how our MEC votes in January.

What about the Supplimental guys that can carry on an endless duty day as long as there's an FE. Very disappointing but I'm not suprised.

"It was tough to implement it on cargo because of the cost-benefit to this," LaHood said. RIGHT! It is tough when the hugely profitable cargo carriers offer hundreds of millions in lobby money to your boss to exempt Cargo carriers...that operate widebody aircraft from the same airports/space. The pax and cargo carriers spend many times more in a quarter on lobbying than the annual costs Mr. LaHood mentions as a result from this rule change. This bull is sprayed dispite the companies having to report massive Qtly expenditures on their lawyer lobby.
He with the most money wins...their should be some big bonuses handed out for this win.

The Tenerife airport disaster occurred on March 27, 1977, when two Boeing 747 passenger aircraft collided on the runway of Los Rodeos Airport (now known as Tenerife North Airport) on the Spanish island of Tenerife, one of the Canary Islands. With a total of 583 fatalities, the crash is the deadliest accident in aviation history.

How about "taxi into" vice land on.:eek:

*repeat from similar thread. Apologies to those reading it twice.:)

The only alternative now is NOT to fly tired ............... Fatigue calls or Sick calls, your choice. I will not fly tired or roll the dice with it ............... The rest of you guys and gals out there know what I am talking about. Do the right thing. These aircraft will not fly without pilots ........... No pilots, no flights. Simple as that ................

I hate talking politics on this board, but give me a break!!!! The White House is almost totally responsible for this. Who do you think has been lobbied the hardest the past few months?? Congress ain't one of them. In the end though, money won the fight, and the millions that UPS spent alone, proved too much to overcome.

The other interesting cutout was passenger troop movements. Another fact supporting that Obama does not give a ******* about troops. Anything he does is for political gain. This NPRM basically declares our troops as second class citizens, not worthy of the same safety standard as the rest of the public.

The only alternative NOW...?!?!?

How is the status quo today different than it was yesterday, or last month, or last year? Calling in fatigued or sick has ALWAYS been our only option... one used by far too few.

Please explain exactly how the WH is "almost totally responsible" for this.

a complete understanding of the situation.

I hate to break it to you, but everything any politician does is for political gain, your guy/gal included.

This is another example of why we should have been negotiating a real contract, essentially creating our own rest rules rather than going after 3/6% and hoping for a gov't glove save. There is no such thing as perpetual growth when it comes to our hourly rates. At some point we have to take a stand and fix QOL before it's too late.

hate to say it, but we lost this in the OMB, which is controlled by the White House. The lobbyists ware able to get the change during the budgeting process. The OMB's purview is to cost out rules/laws, not change them. This whole thing is totally corrupt, regardless of party. Follow the money....

What he said!!!!! Hate to tell ya, UPS has spent the past few months lobbying the WH and the OMB, not congress. The IPA has also been very active in visits to the WH. The WH had FINAL say in what and who was included in the new rest rules. While I think they are all scumbags, the final say came from 1600 Pennsyvania Ave. Nothing else to really "explain"!

Also here is clip from our Union Leader!!!

The FAA yielded to "unprecedented industry pressure" in exempting cargo airlines from the rules, Robert Travis, president of the Independent Pilots Association, said in a statement. The union represents pilots at United Parcel Service Inc.

"Today, the executive branch has decided that the price of aviation safety, in the form of new pilot rest rules, is too high," Travis said.

Why would anyone contribute a single penny to ALPA and the PAC. With all their influence getting the current occupant into the White House, he repays them this way. What a bunch of fools contribute to this.

One party tells everyone they are for the working class, while destroying jobs and stabbing them in the gut like this. The other is pro business, which is generally not good for the working man, but at least they are honest about it. On the plus side, pro business creates jobs.

The solution, of course, is perfect hindsight.

Being a proud 32%er, I wonder now how the numb n*ts that voted FOR the FDX FDA package feel? Now the company will slow roll us until the end of time, for they got their desires for a measily 6% raise. Now, nothing left for them to gain, so "negotiations" will be limited to peanut butter & jelly sandwiches or chicken chef salad at lunch.

A basic rule of negotiations is never, never, never give up the power card unless the other side has guaranteed measurable, definite and large benefits in other areas.

The 6% raise will be overcome by inflation in a few more years. Then, it'll be up to us (after proceeding down the proper and legal paths...) to go into self-help. Ha ha ha. Our pilot group at FDX has the backbone of an amoeba and the company knows it.

We gave them our power card for a measily 6%. Any QOL dreams are just that... dreams. Any improvements in the other contract issues (real time anything; deviation bank issues; our crazy disputed pairing process where the company has the final say on grading themselves....) are similarly pipe dreams.

Agreed...................

I guess you are saying the PAC shouldn't have fought against Baseball Style Arbitration either.

Cause we know how bad that has worked for all the baseball players.

We settled for 3% last contract, you dont think an arbitrator would have given us that?

I feel fine. I did not vote on that based on the NPRM. I voted based on the virtual certainty that there would be no movement until the economy made significant improvement. The NPRM issue was just icing to cement my decision. My decision was valid, and it still is valid. No issue with "20/20 hindsight" here. I would do it again.

MD pilot,
Perhaps your venting over the outrage of the FAA's decision, but your statements regarding ALPA PAC are uninformed. ALPA (and PAC laws) have been very clear regarding what can be done with PAC funds. If you read the documents that ALPA sends regarding the PAC, and what they have done (in the past several issues of the ALPA magazine) you would have a more informed and factual understanding of what ALPA PAC does and does not do. (hint they are not an election Super-PAC).

ALPA PAC has not been 100% successful in all its endeavors on our behalf (especially in the narcissitic culture of what have "You" done for "Me" lately attitide), but in the aformentioned publications, ALPA detailed endeavors that they have had successful influence.

I'm just as disappointed as the next guy about the rationale & decision of the cargo cut-out, but in aggregate it is positive for the pax carriers.

You may (or not) want to become more informed on the factual matters that affect our industry & livelihood. The actual final rule & explanation can be read here: http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...-FinalRule.pdf.

Around the pg 240- 260, and in the preambles you will see tha jaggernaut of the corporate industry lobby (to include the Chamber of Commerce- you do know who they politically aligned with right? hint ...the world's largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses)

If ALPA had no representation in the process, things would be much much worse. You can read the final rule.pdf and you will see the mulit-axis attacks by the industry lobby in their attempt to defeat this NPRM.

The point is that we (pilots) need represenation, and the forces that are against us are 1) organized 2) financed 3)relentless to achieve their objectives (which are not aligned to ours). ALPA PAC is our best and currently only way to have a voice in these forums.

We need all the crew force to understand this. Uninformed opinions, misperceptions, about exactly what the PAC does & doesnt do leads to a lack of support, which in the end, limits the resources they can bring to bear. (if you read the pdf you'll see the myriad of legal challenges the corp lobby thru against the FAA to challenge- this cost $$)

Curious as to how the "WH" had the final say in this Rule. Did you read the final ruling, it is very enlightening. http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...-FinalRule.pdf

It is spelled out (in 300 some pages) The WH OMB has the responsibility for cost analysis, but the FAA under the DOT has the final decision making authority (what to decide based on the cost analysis..(and industry "comments" i.e. lobbying) of the rulemaking. The report delineates the actions that the opposing lobby presented for the cut-out.

I'm disappointed with the rule, and disagree, but would like to know how the WH "made" the cut out, when the FAA makes the ruling? Read the report.

--maybe we can have a alchohol cut out for cargo pilots, so we can legally drink more & sooner befor we fly?!?

The FAA’s authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the
United States Code. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in 49
U.S.C. § 44701(a)(5), which requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations and
minimum safety standards for other practices, methods, and procedures necessary for
safety in air commerce and national security. This rulemaking is also promulgated under
the authority described in 49 U.S.C. § 44701(a)(4), which requires the Administrator to
promulgate regulations in the interest of safety for the maximum hours or periods of
service of airmen and other employees of air carriers.