A Question for Blue-Aid Drinkers?

[Hutcha]

What is the big benefit to management? As I see it, all they save is the hotel cost for two pilots and a little per diem. This doesn't require fewer pilots to run the schedule. The airline won't save a ton of money, but the pilots will be more productive. This benefits the pilot group more so than the airline.

Let's recap...
30 in 7 to remain
100 in 30 to remain
1000 in a year to remain
Duty day limits to remain (or poss be shortened)
Limited to 2 legs a day
Limited to normal waking hours
Maybe a limit to prevent flying these trips in two consecutive days.

I've flown plenty of 14-15 hour days that had 4-6 legs, and that is much more fatiguing than a 13 hr day with 2 legs.

 

[FNG320]

What you guys fail to realize is that eventually ALL airline mangements will try and exploit this to their advantage. If you guys are truly supporting this, I guess it is true there is a thing called Blue Kool Aid.

Thanks a lot guys. Enjoy the wrath of your peers over this.

Exemption my ass.

Bman,
I am the last one to be accused of drinking the kool aid, but I support the plan. Read my other posts, it is a win-win-win-win situation. It is only a lose-lose-lose to those that hate change, or for those that like rigged trips, or those who don't want to be at home with the wife and kids.

Just my opinion...

FNG

 

[FNG320]

Quote:
Originally Posted by B-atch
How about 8 hrs. flight time and a 12 hr. duty day......That sounds better..



Sounds great, but can't be done. Only the top 10% of pilots get such a schedule. Not even JB can get the average productivity up to 7-8 hours. Like I said, it sounds great, but is not do-able.

However if you could do any two legs and get anywhere between 9-11 hours per day, in a 14 hour day, that would be great. Remember any two legs. Would not have to be a Transcon. How about JFK-FLL-LGB ron LGB-FLL-JFK. That would be about 9 hours per day and 18 for the trip. With a duty day of less than 12. One more good day trip and you have 26 hours in three days. Net result would be 80-90 hours in 10-11 days, with shorter duty days than doing four legs JFK-FLL-JFK-BUF-JFK to get 8 hours in a 14 hour day.

Now if you did true transcons, JFK-SEA-JFK and get 11.5 hours in 14 hours, and then do it again you get 23 hours in 2 days. Just add a 3rd day of 5-6 hours and get 29 hours in three days. Thats 85-90 hours in 9 days. with only 14 hour duty days.

Everyone needs to remember that the hours per pilot does not change (30 in 7, 100 per month, 1000 per year). Thus the number of pilots needed by each airline remains the same. But we become more productive and get more time off, more rest per layover and more days off. If you only want the minimum number of hours, you could get your hours in 7 days and have 23 days off! Sounds like a win-win-win-win for everyone.

Win for the pilot (see above), win for the company (reduces layovers, perdiem and hotel costs) helping with cost and saves your paycheck from cuts, and win for the unions by no reduction in the number of pilots to pay dues, win for the commuters as this waiver would not affect them. I guess the only loser are the guys who like to bid rigged trips as there would be no need to rig a trip. (but again saving the companies money and your job/paycheck)

But just my opinion...

FNG

 

[Flechas]

Talk about resurrection!!

 

[Captain Overs]

I am sure you meant trying to change some of them. If you are happy flying your ass off for your wages fine. It is not a question of bemoaning your company or it's policies, but a blatent attempt to change a FAR that has an unlimited potential for abuse. You guys are more in dreamland than I thought if you don't think other managements will exploit this rule. The FAR's are a joke as they stand now and you want to relax them even further?

I guess that you are all so enamored to be flying for a living you can't see the true consequences and ramifications of your actions for the rest of your peers within the industry.

The race to the bottom continues.

This is the purpose of a Union, to stop crap like this from happening. Oh wait....Jet Blue doesn't have one!

 

[IB6 UB9]

This is the purpose of a Union, to stop crap like this from happening. Oh wait....Jet Blue doesn't have one!

Why do airlines have unions?

 

[IB6 UB9]

Why do airlines have unions?

Well...let me take a stab at that. Is it so your rusty sherriff's badge doesn't look like a train drove through it? Fortunately we don't have that problem over here yet. Yet? If that time comes we'll be sure to get the number off our furloughed cards and make the call!

 

[FNG320]

This is the purpose of a Union, to stop crap like this from happening. Oh wait....Jet Blue doesn't have one!

Hey,
If we at JB want this, let us do what we want. IF we had an inhouse union, our members would vote yes on this. Let your union protect you from the change if you don't like it. (just like scope clauses, hour limits, etc). Or just like the age 60 rule (oh, they have changed their position on that recently haven't they......) Unless you don't think your union is worth a crap.

Just my opinion....

FNG

 

[heilhaavir]

Dizel8, in one of your posts you wrote: <<They wish to do Hawaii out and backs>>. That was already the case @ ATA/Omni/Ryan/Southern and actually anybody who wants to do it since done under Intl rules.......

 

[Dizel8]

Dizel8, in one of your posts you wrote: <<They wish to do Hawaii out and backs>>. That was already the case @ ATA/Omni/Ryan/Southern and actually anybody who wants to do it since done under Intl rules.......

I heard it was Hawaiian or Aloha looking for this, but I stand corrected, thank you. I guess the body gets less tired if it is Int'l, however, are we talking two or three pilot crews?

 

[Falconjet]

A point of correction for the ALPA haters at jB: ALPA has not changed their position on the age 60 rule. They have simply started an information campaign to enlighten the membership on the origins and background of the age 60 rule. The plan is to inform the membership and THEN poll the membership on what they think of the age 60 rule. After polling the membersip it is quite possible that they may change their position on the age 60 rule. At this time ALPA has NOT changed its stance in regard to the age 60 rule.

Over a year ago I promised the blue koolaid drinkers that I would mind my own business about jetBlue and what I thought about some of their policies. I have lived up to that promise. If you are going to take a cut at ALPA (which I would argue you have every right to do EVEN if you aren't a member - free country right, even though I wasn't supposed to comment on jetBlue since I didn't work there) you should at least have your facts straight.

By the way, I am against any changes or exemptions that increase either the 8 hours per day or duty time limits per day.

Just my humble opinion.

Again, best of luck to all the folks at jetBlue.

FJ

 

[Dizel8]

At this time JB has NOT changed its stance in regard to the 8 hr limit!

They have commenced research on the circadian rhythm issue and after those facts are in, they will then determine their course of action. It is very possible, that they will not endorse changing the limits.

NASA has long recommended, that pilots be allowed to take short naps in the cockpit, however, the FAA has strenously disregarded this, even though it is practiced overseas and that it has been proven alertness is increased.

We all know, that rather nasty schedules can be built. Schedules that are very fattiguing and that can wreak havoc on the body, the FAA and the airlines has been dragging their feet on this. DW even mentioned his dispproval for the lack of a NPRM. Before you go shooting from he hip and calling all JB pilots stupid, let's at least have a look at the data. Who knows, it may show that an overhaul is needed, without changes to the 8 hr rule and this might prompt the FAA to finally take action, as they did with he Whitlow letter!

 

[8vATE]

A point of correction for the ALPA haters at jB: ALPA has not changed their position on the age 60 rule. They have simply started an information campaign to enlighten the membership on the origins and background of the age 60 rule. The plan is to inform the membership and THEN poll the membership on what they think of the age 60 rule. After polling the membersip it is quite possible that they may change their position on the age 60 rule. FJ

Wow..

this thread comes back to life...
from when...?
January??

Hey Falcon..
I still get the ALPA mag..

don't you really think the "informational campaign" is just positioning to save face...?

No one can argue that things have changed..

Going to 62-63 looks very doable...

Scary part is if we have to adopt European standards of physicals...
Resembling the old AMR interview physical..

Don't know how many people will want to sign off on that...
But 62-63 may not require that drastic of a rewrite of the regs...

????

I feel bad for a LOT of guys...
The USAirways guys are screwed....
Nothing like expecting an 80-90k pension and then be looking at $25,000/yr..

That is CRIMINAL....


this 8 in 24 exemption is being very suspiciously looked at by most in the jb group... esp the guys from the majors, commuters and cargo..
we've seen these "fantastic" ideas bite us in the butt..

but all the research seems to be on the up and up... the same guy who did the NASA research in the 90s....

and theoretically the 8+ hour trips are going to be very tightly built and watched....

FWIW...

 

[heilhaavir]

I heard it was Hawaiian or Aloha looking for this, but I stand corrected, thank you. I guess the body gets less tired if it is Int'l, however, are we talking two or three pilot crews?

You are correct, doesn't make it less tiring, just allowed by the regs. On a 3 man crew airplane it's one crew and on a 2 man crew an additional crewmember is required. (approx 10hrs round trip)

Amazingly enough, under Intl rules, Flt Attendants have more restrictive rules than us. FA's have duty time requirements and we have flt time requirements in 24, 48 & 72 hrs respectively. Fortunately for us our contract is more restrictive than the FARs

 

[Spooky 1]

Hawaii turns

Yaks,

Why is it a dumb idea? Is it better to mess up your body clock. Is it worse than commuting in one the same day and then doing a redeye transcon or "pond" jump. Both of which is done frquently by crewmembers.

Flying Farmer,

No, jetBlue does not exist in a vacuum and btw, we are not the only carrier petition the FAA for this, apparently one of the majors have been interested for years. They wish to do Hawaii out and backs. Not sure where you get ten days off a month from, but the jetBlue pilots have at least 14, with the average days of around 16 and senior pilots just shy of 18, this while flying 75-80 hrs a month. Productivity is rather high and the pilot group has endorsed this. Most people here prefer to be home with their families, as I am sure you do.

PLS,

As someone said, the exemption would apply to jetBlue and would be restricted to daylight transcons, with limits on legs and landings, ie 2 legs, 2 landings. I think that is better than flying out in the morning, "resting 12 hours, then flying a redeye back.
Certainly is a lot better than "standups", you know where you fly three hours, go to the hotel for 6 and then fly three hours back. Quite legal, but very hard on the body.

The studies done by NASA supports that from a scientific stand point, just like NASA endorses powernaps as does quite a few foreign carriers.

I would gladly see the FAA raise the 30 in 7, to perhaps 35 in seven. The 30 in 7 rule made sense when prop planes was involved, but with the advent of quiter, more ergonomic cockpits, I believe it would be as safe. Would rather see a reduction in duty limits from 16 to 14 and believe that would enhance safety more.

Not sure where you have been all this time but airlines have been doing HNL turns for years now. And yes it will give you lines of time with only 10 working days. Typically go very senior.

A little piece of history here. Back in the good old days when the DC7 was first introduced at AA, it took 10 hours non-stop to fly from LAX to JFK (IDL). AA had the aircraft first and wanted relief from the 8 hour rules in place at that time. UAL was at a serious competitive disadvantage and balked at any such relief for AA. Finally after a cat fight between AA, ALPA and UAL there was relief granted. The bitterness behind this event was one of, if not the most significant cause of AA pulling out of ALPA.