ABC Investigates lack of pilot sleep

[Northern Lights]

http://kstp.com/news/stories/S1041636.shtml?cat=1

The wonderful MCW/FOD highspeed is highlighted. I know of FAs that bid that one all month so they can get home before the kids leave for school (schedualed arrival time in MSP is 6:30am, and it is often early).

If you can operate on 3 hours of sleep, it's great, but I'm of the camp that would like to do just a few CDOs per month.

 

[pilotyip]

All of the solutions offered here reduce A/C productivity with present crews, thereby reducing efficiency resulting in cutting costs, read wages, to stay profitable. Or have the same crews give up days off to work less each day, or hire more pilots and spread the present total pilot compensation amongst more pilots in order to remain profitable. How many pilots want these solutions? BTW Am I reading this wrong, but is there any realization of how almost every passenger airline is only marginally profitable. Adding any costs or additional inefficiencies to an operation can destroy the operation.

 

[SLUF4]

How will it destroy the operation? Do you really think people are going to just stop flying totally? I don't. Sure, we would lose a little load, but a plane can be profitable with 1 passenger if you charge enough money and the ticket is sold. Flying is not something that has to be affordable to every American. The price should reflect proper maintenance, crew costs, fuel, etc... If another airline can do it cheaper and make money-that's capitalism at work. Remember Skybus and their $9 fares? It didn't work.

 

[sweptback]

Correction: The position has been that more than 3 CDOs in a row were unsafe. CDO lines were going fairly Senior before the rig in this contract. Check your facts.

I wasn't talking about the MEC position, I was talking about the crewroom banter on the line.

And CDOs have gone much, much more senior since the contract. I used to be able to hold a CDO line -- not anymore.

 

[pilotyip]

Higher prices ='s less Pax

How will it destroy the operation? Do you really think people are going to just stop flying totally? I don't. Sure, we would lose a little load, but a plane can be profitable with 1 passenger if you charge enough money and the ticket is sold. Flying is not something that has to be affordable to every American. The price should reflect proper maintenance, crew costs, fuel, etc... If another airline can do it cheaper and make money-that's capitalism at work. Remember Skybus and their $9 fares? It didn't work.

Less pax ='s fewer pilots. Adam Smith figured it out in 1780. Supply and demand, you raise the price of an item, you have less demand. The airlines live on filling that would be empty seat with a person willing to pay $9, $25, $29, $49 or $99. You want go back to regulation, would that be OK?

 

[SLUF4]

So you think we should just give seats away to fill them and have thousands of packed planes in the sky not making money with fatigued pilots at the controls? Is that better?

 

[ualdriver]

Less pax ='s fewer pilots. Adam Smith figured it out in 1780. Supply and demand, you raise the price of an item, you have less demand. The airlines live on filling that would be empty seat with a person willing to pay $9, $25, $29, $49 or $99. You want go back to regulation, would that be OK?

Rest rules are currently BROKEN pilotyip. The protections they provide pilots are currently INADEQUATE, period. If the new rules raise the price of tickets and/or cause the average pilot to have "less days off" at home (both of which I think will be minimally impacted IMO), then sobeit. Basically your arguments are that a revision of rest rules are going to increase airline costs and therefore cause less demand and therefore cost jobs, correct? If that's the case, I'll take that choice rather than have a jet crash into my house with two tired pilots at the controls who didn't notice the airspeed bleeding off or an authothrottle disconnecting, for example, than a loss of a few jobs.

 

[Skywest Pylot]

All of the solutions offered here reduce A/C productivity with present crews, thereby reducing efficiency resulting in cutting costs, read wages, to stay profitable. Or have the same crews give up days off to work less each day, or hire more pilots and spread the present total pilot compensation amongst more pilots in order to remain profitable. How many pilots want these solutions? BTW Am I reading this wrong, but is there any realization of how almost every passenger airline is only marginally profitable. Adding any costs or additional inefficiencies to an operation can destroy the operation.

So, are you suggesting that you are ok with the current situation with regard to pilot rest and fatigue?

 

[SLUF4]

This has been on the NTSB's recommendation list for years-how many more people must die until people understand that a change is needed? I don't care if my load factor is 70% if it makes flying many times safer. As far as days off; the contract spells out the minimum days off we get-if you think that's inadequate then we should negotiate for more days off. I'd rather increase my chances of actually making it to my days off by ensuring that I'm fit to fly.

 

[Nevets]

As far as days off; the contract spells out the minimum days off we get-if you think that's inadequate then we should negotiate for more days off.

Yes, unionized pilot groups can stop using negotiating capital to decrease duty limits and use it to increase days off instead.