Schuster amendment dropped from FAA Bill

That any changes to the FAR's (think new flight/duty time rules about to come out that are favorable to pilots) would have to have a cost/benefit analysis done and be considered cost effective before they could be implemented. That's a paraphrase, so do some google research if you really want to know more. One of our pilots was involved with the drafting of the new duty time rules and when the Schuster amendment came out she said it could have a major negative impact on the new rules.
 
U.S. airlines, through their trade group, the Washington- based Air Transport Association, have called the FAA rule “onerous.” The group said the proposal would cost the industry $19.6 billion over a decade.
Click to expand...

You know what else costs lots of money? Oxygen masks, seat belts, training, life-limited parts, insurance, regulators... oh, and accidents. Deal with it.
 
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Not just the pilots DE, but the public that uses air transport. Win-Win.

A lose for the ambulance chasers. With more safety comes less accidents; hence less litigation; less billable hours for the lawyers.
 
yeah,,, lets charge our employers $19 billion over the next 10 years. thats going to foster growth and job security for us! :sarcasm:
 
Murdoughnut said:
Safety > Jobs
Click to expand...

[devilsadvocate]what is wrong with the level of safety we have now? How much "safer" do we really need to make things? I mean let's face it, planes aren't exactly falling out of the sky under the current rest regulations.[/devilsadvocate]
 
Roger said:
[devilsadvocate]what is wrong with the level of safety we have now? How much "safer" do we really need to make things? I mean let's face it, planes aren't exactly falling out of the sky under the current rest regulations.[/devilsadvocate]
Click to expand...

Are you even an airline pilot? If you are I am suprised you would be satisfied with the current rest rules. If you lost a loved one you wouldn't be playing devils advocate would you? Just one crash is too many!
 
I don't see (and haven't seen, as this has been going on) if this is limited to all 121 ops; is it inclusive of 135 and 121? or just 121?
 
gosleddog said:
I don't see (and haven't seen, as this has been going on) if this is limited to all 121 ops; is it inclusive of 135 and 121? or just 121?
Click to expand...

this particular amendment was aimed at separating the duty time rules of the 121 and 135. The reasoning given in senate testimony was that it would handcuff air ambulance operations and ferrying military back and forth. Of course the real reason the ATA fought against 135 getting the same work rules comes down to money.
 
Hernandezcfi said:
Are you even an airline pilot? If you are I am suprised you would be satisfied with the current rest rules. If you lost a loved one you wouldn't be playing devils advocate would you? Just one crash is too many!
Click to expand...

I'm not a working pilot, no. And I agree with you, not because of experience but because all the airline guys on here say the same thing that you do: rest rules are antiquated and inadequate. I trust the judgment of people in the industry, because I know a little bit about it. But realize, people in the industry are not the ones you have to convince. For anyone outside the industry, looking at pure statistics, and separate from emotion and personal involvement, the numbers say we are in the safest era of airline flying ever. That being the case, what does such an individual stand to gain from the added expense of such a rule change? An small reduction of an already infinitesimally small risk?
 
bill_shuster.gif


Thanks a whole lot for trying to put financial constraints on safety improvements that are a few decades overdue, Bill.

Better luck next time.

I'm almost ashamed to have grown up in the same US state as this man that claims to represent part of it.

He's obviously for sale to the highest bidding lobbyist, like so many.


Great news for not only flight crews, but anyone who ever steps foot on an airplane!
 
Roger said:
I'm not a working pilot, no. And I agree with you, not because of experience but because all the airline guys on here say the same thing that you do: rest rules are antiquated and inadequate. I trust the judgment of people in the industry, because I know a little bit about it. But realize, people in the industry are not the ones you have to convince. For anyone outside the industry, looking at pure statistics, and separate from emotion and personal involvement, the numbers say we are in the safest era of airline flying ever. That being the case, what does such an individual stand to gain from the added expense of such a rule change? An small reduction of an already infinitesimally small risk?
Click to expand...

Luck has alot to do with that! If you ever looked over next to you to see shoulder straps holding the guy next to you up and wonder how you can blame the guy when your on the 15th hour of duty you might not consider the "added expense" to the Airlines who act like the rich old lady with a Virginia Ham in one hand crying because she has no bread!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top