American pilots weren’t allowed to strike, so instead they did something clever

[laker4284]

This is a great thread. I find it fascinating that highly experienced pros can't agree on the answer to that most common interview question. Would half of you not be able to make it through the interview now without lying?

I also wonder, given the strong opinions here, how many different interviewERS might be expecting different answers when they ask that question.

As an aside, I once failed an interview with a fly-by-night DC8 operator, over that exact question. I later found out that those who answered that, he11 yes they would go, got the job, and those of us who said we would follow the FARs, did not get the job. Apparently their business model did not allow for the cost of following all the FARs. They eventually went out of business, so I guess nature just followed its course.

Here's some irony: I answered the exact opposite of you and failed to get a job with a legacy that grew to be one of the largest in the world. For them, common sense trumped blind adherence to the book. I didn't understand that then (at 28).

Years (and a bankrupt carrier) later I understood the benefit of judgement calls, grey areas and common sense.

 

[C-150ETOPS]

So what happens in this scenario if you substitute "an outstation on Christmas eve" to "Kandahar or Bagram"? It's black and white right? Guess you gotta go stay in a tent for a couple nights while the company sends in a part. Same for you AA73, I'll bet if you do a military charter and take some troops downrange you'd call it quits and have the FA's all hunker down for a few days in a tent city.

$5 says the SOP is to take off with the lights out anyways.

Got another one?


I guess you missed the point I made regarding the exposure to violations noticed by passengers vs boxes.

Since I can't upload a coloring book picture in a format you might understand, I'll just drop the debate.

later

 

[lionflyer]

$5 says the SOP is to take off with the lights out anyways.

Got another one?


I guess you missed the point I made regarding the exposure to violations noticed by passengers vs boxes.

Since I can't upload a coloring book picture in a format you might understand, I'll just drop the debate.

later

I'll take that bet because beleive it or not, some companies require you to light up like a christmas tree on TO & Landing no matter where you go. And in Afganistan, you are flat out stupid to do that. It's management's lack of line experience and sometimes incompetence. Of course the SOP will change in a heartbeat the second a plane is destroyed by a SAM.

 

[JimNtexas]

I'm just a lowly bugsmasher guy, but not too long ago the tower at KAUS pointed out that I had a burned out nav light.

AFAIK I'm not getting violated, but I don't sell tickets either.

 

[Turtle21]

It's easy for some to say here that they would play hard ball and write up the nav light but in the heat of the battle I highly doubt more than a few would write up the nav light. It's an easy oversight on a pre flight and the FAA isn't going to hang you if you tell them..."hey, I didn't notice it on the prefligth". It's one thing to ignore an inop fire test, but an inop nav light. In my best Chris Carter voice, C-mon Man !!!

I have never seen a Nav light out myself, but I have pilot friends that have seen them out... but they say it only happens during the day, during post flight at company maintenance locations.... except for my friends at AA, it always happens at night, preflight, away from company maintenance.

 

[Ops check good]

I have never seen a Nav light out myself, but I have pilot friends that have seen them out... but they say it only happens during the day, during post flight at company maintenance locations.... except for my friends at AA, it always happens at night, preflight, away from company maintenance.

Perfect. :beer:

 

[JohnQ]

" What happens to the FO's license if the Capt decides to fly with the nav light inop? '

- You operate as a Crew.

- You have colluded with the Captain to circumvent FAR.

- You will be violated accordingly.

There are many accident studies that find that an "unassertive First Officer" contributed to the accident scenario by allowing the Captain to go outside the realm of common sense and regulation.

This is how CRM came about.


YKW

Depends. At DAL our FOM specifically states that if the Capt calls for something that is wrong, the F/O is to point out his error. If the Capt still insists, the book states that his command is to be obeyed. If the F/O does his part, my guess is the FAA won't bother him at all.

Before everyone says "you're kidding me!" think of it this way. At DAL if the vis is < 3/4 of a mile, we must fly an ILS coupled to the autopilot (though autoland is not required). I knew an old captain on the 727 who would handfly every approach regardless of the vis. Once he hand-flew when the vis was right at 2400 RVR. The F/O noticed he was hand-flying and asked if he was going to couple up the airplane. "Nah" the capt replied.

So...we backed him up on the approach, because even though the Capt was wrong, DAL would rather have us backing him up and sort of being on the same page, rather than fighting all the way down the G/S with half mile vis!

After we land, on the other hand...

 

[gringo]

"Full AC. W&B has us 2lbs overweight. Not 200. TWO!!! And this is the FAA approved W&B program that lists each PAX at 185lbs carryon included. But if you put said carryon in the cargo because of size etc, you just magically added 25 extra lbs to the AC and the PAX is still 185lb. Company policy at the time was bump people before bags. What do you do Skipper?"

Move the cargo/payload/paperwork around until it is correct and legal according to the approved W&B program. If there is no solution other than to bump people or bags or both I would give the problem to Ops. , S.O.C. ( ( or whomever at a given company ) and ask them how they would like to proceed. If they want to bump people that's there prerogative and their policy.


WL

How about firing up the APU for, oh, I dunno, 30 seconds or so and burn off 2 lbs of fuel? Then make the W&B match your new fuel load?

 

[CA1900]

Maybe there's something else that can be removed?

My previous company carried a mounted spare tire in cargo in case it was ever needed at an outstation. When faced with a similar situation (about 10 pounds over max zero-fuel weight), I got authorization to have that tire removed at the outstation so we could take everybody and their bags. We picked it back up next time through that outstation when the loads were lighter.

Of course, that was when everybody was getting along. Things like the above pretty much stopped when they instituted the "get sick 3 times in six months and you're fired" policy. And they wonder why they got a union.

 

[Whine Lover]

How about firing up the APU for, oh, I dunno, 30 seconds or so and burn off 2 lbs of fuel? Then make the W&B match your new fuel load?

Yup. That's what I said:

" Move the cargo/payload/paperwork around until it is correct and legal..."

There are about a thousand ways to do that as we all know.

The problem with all these hypothetical , black-and-white scenarios IS the authors want to put you in a " are you going to break/bend the rules" absolute, situation.

There are usually several solutions that will leave you an out that is a safe, logical, and legal path of action.


Whiner