The warping of intent: FAR 117

SpiceWeasel

SpiceWeasel

Tre Kronor
Day 1 complete, I have a new understanding of FAR 117 extension refusals thanks to an ALPA rep. At least one particular company is interpreting the "Captain" portion of FAR 117 to the letter. The Captain may accept or refuse an extension. Nowhere in the regulation may the First Officer refuse an extension. This leads to the next point: a Captain may refuse an extension for any grounds and nothing will come of it. The First Officer will find a new Captain with a fresh duty clock seated next to him. He cannot refuse - he can only legally call in fatigued, which costs the First Officer his sick bank.

It's too late to fix this - if we open up the regulations to re-writing we can potentially open a can of worms. It's up to our bargaining agent to hopefully spend a tiny bit of capital allowing First Officers the opportunity to refuse or accept an extension.

One final note: "unforeseen circumstance" is not clearly defined in the FARs. The FAA left it up to the Air Carriers to define it. At one particular carrier, unforeseen is unofficially designated "at the issuance of the monthly schedule". Anything that happens after they know the staffing required to fly the schedule as-is is considered unforeseen. If you can convince scheduling that the email about an upcoming IROP is "foreseen", please revert to problem 1 if you are a first officer.

I do not think that the FAA will take ASAPs about extension requests 5-8 hours prior to they are required seriously. I have filed one such ASAP and never heard any follow up.

I appreciate the 10 hours, but the table is worthless. Might as well tack on 30 minutes to each of the times as that's what is expected.
 
1) Seems like a good 'at cruise' discussion to have on leg one with all the new Captains you fly with.

2) Contract negotiations.
 
I think "unforeseen circumstance" is one the worst part of the reg. One hour prior to departure of the last leg and we can foresee a lengthy maintenance delay? Or is it unforeseen because earlier in the day no one knew about it? Either way, the PIC must agree with an extension, without calling in fatigued. Never thought about the FO part. I always thought of it as the PIC, meaning the crew collectively, both came to the conclusion that they are or not extending.
 
mastermags said:
1) Seems like a good 'at cruise' discussion to have on leg one with all the new Captains you fly with.

2) Contract negotiations.
Click to expand...

1) I can tell the new CA until I'm blue in the face... But that doesn't mean I can refuse. I'm good to go for 30 min to 2 hours.

wheelsup said:
I don't know why this stuff is so hard. If you're tired call out, if you're fine continue working. People try to make mountains out of molehills.
Click to expand...

No, not this simple. You can refuse an extension when you are not fatigued (as a CA): if the extension is foreseen. It's up to you to ensure the company follows the rule. However, it's up to them to define unforeseen.

Sure, if you like burning sick time for fatigue calls. You should be paid for the leg you could not do without extending regardless of the reason for the extension refusal.

Why should the only reason to refuse an extension be "fatigue"?

@wheelsup: you would accept an extension if asked when the reason for the extension at the end of your day was the 30 minute EDCT you had on leg 1 of 4? Is the end of your day still "unforeseen"?
 
Blackhawk said:
I think this comes down to being careful where you work. I've never had any of the issues listed above.
Click to expand...

Because you are a Captain. Why does everyone gloss over that 117 does not cover refusals for FOs?

You would be surprised though - be careful where you work: 8th company on Forbes list of best places, and this is what they do.
 
Where I work there is no part 117 and we are not ALPA. Either crewmember can call fatigue. It's a complicated process but before they doc your sick bank your FAT call is reviewed by a joint company/union committee. They look at the circumstances and the case you make and decide if your sick bank gets docked.
 
DE727UPS said:
Where I work there is no part 117 and we are not ALPA. Either crewmember can call fatigue. It's a complicated process but before they doc your sick bank your FAT call is reviewed by a joint company/union committee. They look at the circumstances and the case you make and decide if your sick bank gets docked.
Click to expand...

Yes, both can call fatigued, but only the CA may refuse an extension per the law. There are reasons other than fatigue for refusing an extension. So, if you don't believe that the company has met the legal standard for "unforeseen" as an FO, you call fatigued and lose pay.
 
Here was a recent "unforeseen" delay...

We were about ready to push and I called clearance to give them a heads up to start working on a release time to our destination airport. They came back and said that the destination airport had issued a ground stop due to weather and it would be in effect for 90 minutes.

We had already accepted a 2 hour extension and were going to be using the majority of it, but this ground stop would mean that we would land about 75 minutes past the end of our extension. At that point, we were at the gate, the door was open, and the jetbridge was connected. We knew of the delay, and in our opinion, it was no longer "unforeseen". We could clearly see that if we pushed, we would land well after our extension ran out.

The company's version of unforeseen and ours is evidently very different, as they said to just ignore the ground stop and push...thus making any further delays unforeseen and we could complete the trip.
 
SpiceWeasel said:
Because you are a Captain. Why does everyone gloss over that 117 does not cover refusals for FOs?

You would be surprised though - be careful where you work: 8th company on Forbes list of best places, and this is what they do.
Click to expand...

I have never, ever been replaced by another captain when I turn down an extension. Never even heard of it before.
Google has an airline?
 
Last edited:
Blackhawk said:
I have never, ever been replaced by another captain when I turn down an extension. Never even heard of it before.
Google has an airline?
Click to expand...

Seriously? It happens all the time. Captain was on short call reserve since 4 AM ... Line holder FO reports at 11:00 AM. Delays hit, captain refuses to extend and goes home. FO good for six more hours. New captain called in to fly with remaining crew.
 
SpiceWeasel said:
Yes, both can call fatigued, but only the CA may refuse an extension per the law. There are reasons other than fatigue for refusing an extension. So, if you don't believe that the company has met the legal standard for "unforeseen" as an FO, you call fatigued and lose pay.
Click to expand...

You only lose sick time if the fatigue was out of your control. A majority of the fatigue calls are paid by the company. It varies month to month, but it's in the 60%-70% range consistently. If you are fatigued due to a long duty day/short overnight, it will most likely be paid by the company.

The fact is if you are fatigued, do the right thing and remove yourself from duty. Let the PTO/Company Paid issue go to the Fatigue committee. Don't do something illegal (affirm fit for duty) due to a concern over PTO.
 
adk said:
Seriously? It happens all the time. Captain was on short call reserve since 4 AM ... Line holder FO reports at 11:00 AM. Delays hit, captain refuses to extend and goes home. FO good for six more hours. New captain called in to fly with remaining crew.
Click to expand...
That's a different animal. Captain and FO on different schedules and in that scenario it would make sense.
He is talking about captain and FO on same schedule (at least I assume he is), captain can refuse extension but FO must take it. I've never heard of that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top