US Airways Pilots Express Concern Following Publishing of FAA's New Rest Rules

jtrain609 said:
There's a very easy solution to the commuting problem; a positive space deadhead to every assignment from your home of record that counts as duty.

That would be the safest option, but it would cost the company money and thus, it'll never happen.

But it's the best solution available. That I have to get to work myself, and that it doesn't count for duty, and that I don't get paid for it astounds everybody I know that isn't a pilot.
Click to expand...
Huh. That is surprising. I would have expected Average Joe to find it unsurprising that you have to get yourself to work-after all Joe's office job does not pay him for his drive to work, whether he lives 5 minutes away or 3 hours away.
 
You could live in base if they didn't change so much.

In 13 years of 121, I've had 6 different bases (and each change was a minimum of 1050 miles). I've been lucky to have such a low count in that regard. The average Joe doesn't average a move every 2 years either.
 
jtrain609 said:
There's a very easy solution to the commuting problem; a positive space deadhead to every assignment from your home of record that counts as duty.

That would be the safest option, but it would cost the company money and thus, it'll never happen.

But it's the best solution available. That I have to get to work myself, and that it doesn't count for duty, and that I don't get paid for it astounds everybody I know that isn't a pilot.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Yes that would be a solution but there's a lot of ways that could backfire. The more money that the company is required to spend, the more influence over commuting they would require. There are VERY few jobs/companies that I can think of that provide the flexibility we enjoy over where we live. I personally think the win/win shared model we have is fine. Fire away.
 
MikeD said:
For the record, I too think that if you're commuting to work, you should be on duty.
Click to expand...
Why are pilots special in this regard? Almost no one is considered on duty during their commute to work. I mean were I a professional pilot I would say yes please, but you've got to admit that it's kind of a hard sell for, well, anyone who is not a pilot.
 
Cav said:
Apparently not enough to not sell them out when push came to shove. It's not just Fed Ex either, it's all the cargo ALPA members and dare I say any ALPA group who flies long haul pax routes. When ALPA national comes out with "ALPA Welcomes Release of Pilot Fatigue Rules," they are basically stating that they took a lot of money from their highest paid pilots and used it to support a ruling that benefits them in no way whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Bingo. The correspondence seemed like all it was missing was a ticker tape and some gaudy floats... Perhaps a celebratory marching band.
 
Roger Roger said:
Why are pilots special in this regard? Almost no one is considered on duty during their commute to work. I mean were I a professional pilot I would say yes please, but you've got to admit that it's kind of a hard sell for, well, anyone who is not a pilot.
Click to expand...

Bottom line, unless we want commuting to be regulated we need to be responsible for our commutes. If we don't and more accidents like BUF occur, "responsible" commuting will be imposed on us through regulation. I often hear a lot of excuses and blame being thrown around but little ownership of responsibility. It's our professional responsibIlity. For the record, I commute.
 
Cav said:
Yes and no. Yes that would be a solution but there's a lot of ways that could backfire. The more money that the company is required to spend, the more influence over commuting they would require. There are VERY few jobs/companies that I can think of that provide the flexibility we enjoy over where we live. I personally think the win/win shared model we have is fine. Fire away.
Click to expand...

That's a fair assessment, but since you asked, I will, in fact, fire away :)

Polar/Atlas/Netjets/a bunch of other companies do home basing. On your first day you're sent to your assignment, and on the last day they bring you home on a paid ticket, so there's industry precedent that it is reasonable.

But on the other hand, you could say that these types of operations are fundamentally different from domestic passenger airlines.

To respond to that, I'd say that airplanes and airplanes, and airlines are airlines, no matter whether you're doing part 91K (NetJets operates as an airline as far as I'm concerned), or part 121 freight.

In the end, though, you could well be right.
 
Roger Roger said:
Why are pilots special in this regard? Almost no one is considered on duty during their commute to work. I mean were I a professional pilot I would say yes please, but you've got to admit that it's kind of a hard sell for, well, anyone who is not a pilot.
Click to expand...

Most of us will end up commuting one way or another.

Considering bases open, bases close. Bases from the far Northwest, to the far Southeast and many points in between, I could name you several hundred DFW pilots that would scold me about commuting from PHX, when, in fact, they're now commuting to NYC, SEA, DTW, etc.
 
Cav said:
Bottom line, unless we want commuting to be regulated we need to be responsible for our commutes. If we don't and more accidents like BUF occur, "responsible" commuting will be imposed on us through regulation. I often hear a lot of excuses and blame being thrown around but little ownership of responsibility. It's our professional responsibIlity. For the record, I commute.
Click to expand...

Same, and as an example of responsible commuting, I need to be at my base for a 5:20 show on Friday. That means a 4:00 a.m. wakeup for a 5:00 a.m. van at the hotel that I paid for. That means I commute in early tomorrow (Thursday) afternoon so I can get 8 hours of sleep. I flatly refuse to show up to an assignment fatigued, as I believe that as a professional, it's my job to show up well rested and ready to do my job, bright eyed and bushy tailed at o'dark thirty.

That being said, I still think that a company provided DH could solve a lot of problems.
 
Roger Roger said:
Why are pilots special in this regard? Almost no one is considered on duty during their commute to work. I mean were I a professional pilot I would say yes please, but you've got to admit that it's kind of a hard sell for, well, anyone who is not a pilot.
Click to expand...

The only difference I can think of is that if, for example, you're jumpseating, aren't you considered not just a pax? You are there to assist the cabin crew, if necessary and are considered a crewmember in that regard? For that responsibility, I believe someone should be on duty in some way. It might be a weak argument, but its one of the key differences I see between someone who JS's, and someone who drives to work and clocks in. I see your argument though.
 
jtrain609 said:
Same, and as an example of responsible commuting, I need to be at my base for a 5:20 show on Friday. That means a 4:00 a.m. wakeup for a 5:00 a.m. van at the hotel that I paid for. That means I commute in early tomorrow (Thursday) afternoon so I can get 8 hours of sleep. I flatly refuse to show up to an assignment fatigued, as I believe that as a professional, it's my job to show up well rested and ready to do my job, bright eyed and bushy tailed at o'dark thirty.

That being said, I still think that a company provided DH could solve a lot of problems.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I mean John. You commute responsibly as many/most do but too many in our ranks will take the last flight out arriving in base at 12 midnight for a 5a show. They'll cite every excuse you can think of to justify it to you during your 5 leg day. Later that evening they'll never quit bitching about the company and their 9 hour overnight in the hotel van on the way to the hotel. It's those people who are unsafe and will ruin it for us. I agree with your premise but at the same time I just wanted to play devil's advocate to point out how it could go the other way.
 
Cav said:
Apparently not enough to not sell them out when push came to shove. It's not just Fed Ex either, it's all the cargo ALPA members and dare I say any ALPA group who flies long haul pax routes. When ALPA national comes out with "ALPA Welcomes Release of Pilot Fatigue Rules," they are basically stating that they took a lot of money from their highest paid pilots and used it to support a ruling that benefits them in no way whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Every other pilot union came out and also said that they welcome the new rules. Why? Because they are a huge improvement. But every one of those unions, including ALPA, also said that they oppose the cargo exemption. There is nothing wrong with celebrating the improvements, while still working to fix the error. No one was "sold out."

ALPA is a regional pilots union now.
Click to expand...

Comical. You say this, while meanwhile the regional pilots claim that ALPA only cares about Delta and United. Neither claim has any basis in reality.

jtrain609 said:
There's a very easy solution to the commuting problem; a positive space deadhead to every assignment from your home of record that counts as duty.

That would be the safest option, but it would cost the company money and thus, it'll never happen.

But it's the best solution available. That I have to get to work myself, and that it doesn't count for duty, and that I don't get paid for it astounds everybody I know that isn't a pilot.
Click to expand...

Seriously? You choose to commute. The company doesn't force you. I could have moved to Detroit when I was at Pinnacle, but I chose to live in Ohio and then Atlanta, so it was my responsibility to get myself to my domicile for trips, as it should be. Until the company starts forcing you to live somewhere other than your domicile, expecting them to provide you a way to work is a little out there.
 
Behold an ALPA rep. It's funny how I keep reading about how wonderful this ruling is from the propaganda the national keeps flooding my inbox with. I hear nothing positive from the avg line pilot. Those emails are being filed right next to the magazine with all the pretty pictures.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Seriously? You choose to commute. The company doesn't force you. I could have moved to Detroit when I was at Pinnacle, but I chose to live in Ohio and then Atlanta, so it was my responsibility to get myself to my domicile for trips, as it should be. Until the company starts forcing you to live somewhere other than your domicile, expecting them to provide you a way to work is a little out there.
Click to expand...

Just like I chose to have my company open and close 3 bases in 18 months and then furlough me and 350 of my coworkers for 2.5 years while the company was nearly run into the ground, partially due to being understaffed.

Yeah, brilliant. I know guys that moved their families to their bases only to be displaced at best, or out of the job at worst.
 
jtrain609 said:
Just like I chose to have my company open and close 3 bases in 18 months and then furlough me and 350 of my coworkers for 2.5 years while the company was nearly run into the ground, partially due to being understaffed.

Yeah, brilliant. I know guys that moved their families to their bases only to be displaced at best, or out of the job at worst.
Click to expand...

3rd base in 18 months coming up for me (that's not a complaint just fact). Spare me ATN_Pilot, I used to buy that BS line as well. We're all one bid away from commuting.
 
Cav said:
Behold an ALPA rep. It's funny how I keep reading about how wonderful this ruling is from the propaganda the national keeps flooding my inbox with. I hear nothing positive from the avg line pilot. Those emails are being filed right next to the magazine with all the pretty pictures.
Click to expand...

+1

The pride of ownership.

This is very dangerous ground as when the Indians get upset, Chief "I Have No Intentions of Running" needs to strt rethinking his strategy. Sometimes that light at the end of the tunnel is actually a train.
 
This is exactly what I was refering to in the other post. The rules, as viewed by the lawmakers, look resonable. However, the implementation of the rules will hurt the average employee.

I can see the airlines requiring the pilots to meet the new rules and whatever the pilots have to do is on them. I don't see the airlines providing free housing to those who choose to live on the other side of the country. AND I don't see the airlines offering more pay to offset the new policy cost to the individual employee. This does not effect me as I fly in a different arena but this isn't a "win" in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top