JBLU in hot water with FAA

[Fins Up]

How long before this thread just dies?

 

[bluejuice787]

The FSDO doesn't write the FARs, he enforces them. He does have some wiggle room, but obviously he doesn't have the authority to create his own regulations. JBLU management should have known better, but they were obviously more focused on their own agenda. Luckily the adults at the national level finally got wind of what was happening and they apparently are none too happy with the cavalier attitude of both JBLU management and the FSDO they entrusted to ensure JBLU's compliance with the FARs.

What are you talking about? You want so badly to prove that JB is the devil that you make up your own crap. What FAR has JB violated? And why have we not been fined?

 

[General Lee]

FDJ2, why such hate for JB? Bashing JB management, from a DL employee, wow. Remind me again how much $ your perfect management team has allowed you to lose in the last 5 years? We were approved for the flights, they happened, and the program will probably never be approved. Let's move on, shall we...

Hey, I don't think there is tremendous JB bashing. I have liked every JB pilot I have ever met. I, and guys like FDJ2, just don't like some of the things your managment is trying to pull. I think transcon turns are dangerous and I am tired after one leg from JFK to LAX. If Jetblue is allowed to do it, maybe the others will try too. That is the problem here. Sure, some guys would love to work only 7 or 8 days a month, but they probably don't commute in or have 4 kids hanging on them while they are home. Those extra factors will lead to an accident.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[General Lee]

What are you talking about? You want so badly to prove that JB is the devil that you make up your own crap. What FAR has JB violated? And why have we not been fined?

Why is there an article about the FA being mad at Jetblue? Did those authors just make it up? Someone is very mad at JB.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[bluejuice787]

Hey, I don't think there is tremendous JB bashing. I have liked every JB pilot I have ever met. I, and guys like FDJ2, just don't like some of the things your managment is trying to pull. I think transcon turns are dangerous and I am tired after one leg from JFK to LAX. If Jetblue is allowed to do it, maybe the others will try too. That is the problem here. Sure, some guys would love to work only 7 or 8 days a month, but they probably don't commute in or have 4 kids hanging on them while they are home. Those extra factors will lead to an accident.

Bye Bye--General Lee

GL-

Our mgt in not trying to "pull" anything. From whom have they looked to for approval to do transcon turns? No one. Our company simply funded a study to determine if it was safe and to learn more about fatigue and flying. You are putting the cart before the horse. Not all change is bad. I can tell you mater of fact that our current system sucks.

Also, do not disagree with most of your argument but I do disagree with the light you are trying to show it under.

Juice

 

[bluejuice787]

Why is there an article about the FA being mad at Jetblue? Did those authors just make it up? Someone is very mad at JB.

Bye Bye--General Lee

I'll presume you mean FAA. When you say mad I am not sure what that means though. Are they our parent?

When the FAA finds fault they cite or fine or open an investigation. None of these things have been done. And yes the authors either made the crap up or they took representatives from ALPA at face value. In either case they were and are wrong.

Juice

 

[FNG320]

Everyone seems so "against" the productivity. Not lets take a common sense look at it. Using Eastern time as a refrence, You start at report at 7am Depart at 8am. Fly 6 hours to the west cost and land at OAK at 2pm. Put in a 1 hour turn and Depart OAK at 3 pm. Fly 5 hours and land at JFK at 8pm. That is 11 hour of block, in a 13 hour duty day. I know that we have many 3 and 4 leg days that only block 7-8 hours due to turns and some "productivity" sits that take 13-14 hours also. Now, which is more tiring, flying 4 legs and hitting the "high risk" take off and landing phases twice 4 times or flying two leg and only hitting the high risk phases of flight twice?

Now, take into acount what "IS" legal to do. Report at 7am, Depart at 8am and fly to OAK and arrive at 2 pm then day sleep (9-10 hours off) to fly the red-eye back to the east coast that night at midnight East Coast time! Fly all night and land at 5AM east coast time. Can you sleep? Do you get good rest? Do you think pilots the do this type of turn are tired? Now, it that smart? Is it legal?

The "transcon turn" is all accomplished in the same time zone, no day sleeps against your body clock. The total duty day is the same as many of the 3 and 4 leg trips that JetBlue and other airlines do. You cut the T/Os and Landings in half. Which do you think is safer? I say the transcon turn is less stressful and keeps you on the same body clock.

Now, JetBlue has said that their goal was to use this for day turns only. To keep those that fly such trips on the same body clock. That they would not do Red-eye turns as this forces guys to shift thier body clock (this is what the NASA days says) Now, if you throw in some good rest rules to go along with this to prevent pilots or the company from abusing this you get a very workable program. I would think that they use rules something like international, double the flying hours of rest. So if you fly a 11 hour tranascon turn, you must get 22 hours of rest. This prevents the senior guys from doing them back to back. For commuters, it basically llimits them to one per commute. Plus, the trip must start and finish on the same calentar day, so it must not fly past midnight of your time zone. These rules would allow a west coast or east coast pilot use the same rules. I could see a commuter getting something like this:

Day 1: 4 Leg 7+30 trip
Day 2: 4 Leg 7+30 trip
Day 3: 2 Leg 11+00 transcon turn.

Total: 26 hours.

The pilot is then required to have day off, as he is basically timed out for the next 4 days (30/7 rule) and he gets lots of rest before he does it again. By having the double hours flown rule, you prevent doing them back to back. What you get is the ability to get 75+ hours in 9 days of fllying, lots of rest, no day sleeps and a better and safer quality of life.

The suggestion about guys commuting all night to do one is also prevented by the requirement to have double the hours off after the flight. It defeats the "productivity" advantage of these trips cause you have to take the next day off. Thus making the trip not desirable for day one of a commute, but good for the last day of a commute.

The idea that only the senior guys would get this is crap. If the the rules I outline above are in affect it limits pilots to 3 or 4 per month (one for each commute). Thus you won't get senior guys sucking up 8-10 of these trips and scheduling them back to back. That means they flow down to the more junior bidders. Many of the senior pilots may support the transcon turns, but so do many of the junior pilots. No one of us speaks for the whole group. There are junior and senior pilots that are both for and against this type of change.

I think using the rules I suggest, you make the program safer than the current FARs. As for ALPAs push that it reduces pilot manning is mostly hog-wash. Pilots will still fly the same number of hours per month per pilot as before. Whether you do it 5 hours a day (15 days for 75 hours), 7 hours a day (11 days for 77 hours) or using my proposed schedule and get 76 hours in 9 days. You get safety and productivity all in one package.

Now, if your pilot group doesn't want such work rules, that is up to your pilots and union to put those rules it in your contract. Which is no different that some the industry contracts out there now that are more restrictive than the FARs.

Just my opinon......

FNG

 

[BlueSurfer]

As a couple of JB pilots have already pointed out... this whole thing was supported and pushed thru by some pretty senior pilots in JFK. The majority of JB pilots do not support this at all... me included! From what I've heard, it will never fly... So let's let this thread die... oh I forgot, we need to bash JB some more...

 

[Jonny Sacko]

ALPA will NEVER let them in now. Trying to ruin the industry at every turn. Too Funny.

 

[airborn]

Those that haven't flown a plane that can fly more than 3 hours might as well be quiet for this subject. A little different things to think about when crossing the country.

 

[bluejuice787]

ALPA will NEVER let them in now. Trying to ruin the industry at every turn. Too Funny.

Uh what? The ALPA convention that just ended in LAS included a session that was dedicated to recruiting Jetblue.

Nice try.

 

[General Lee]

Everyone seems so "against" the productivity. Not lets take a common sense look at it. Using Eastern time as a refrence, You start at report at 7am Depart at 8am. Fly 6 hours to the west cost and land at OAK at 2pm. Put in a 1 hour turn and Depart OAK at 3 pm. Fly 5 hours and land at JFK at 8pm. That is 11 hour of block, in a 13 hour duty day. I know that we have many 3 and 4 leg days that only block 7-8 hours due to turns and some "productivity" sits that take 13-14 hours also. Now, which is more tiring, flying 4 legs and hitting the "high risk" take off and landing phases twice 4 times or flying two leg and only hitting the high risk phases of flight twice?

Now, take into acount what "IS" legal to do. Report at 7am, Depart at 8am and fly to OAK and arrive at 2 pm then day sleep (9-10 hours off) to fly the red-eye back to the east coast that night at midnight East Coast time! Fly all night and land at 5AM east coast time. Can you sleep? Do you get good rest? Do you think pilots the do this type of turn are tired? Now, it that smart? Is it legal?

The "transcon turn" is all accomplished in the same time zone, no day sleeps against your body clock. The total duty day is the same as many of the 3 and 4 leg trips that JetBlue and other airlines do. You cut the T/Os and Landings in half. Which do you think is safer? I say the transcon turn is less stressful and keeps you on the same body clock.

Now, JetBlue has said that their goal was to use this for day turns only. To keep those that fly such trips on the same body clock. That they would not do Red-eye turns as this forces guys to shift thier body clock (this is what the NASA days says) Now, if you throw in some good rest rules to go along with this to prevent pilots or the company from abusing this you get a very workable program. I would think that they use rules something like international, double the flying hours of rest. So if you fly a 11 hour tranascon turn, you must get 22 hours of rest. This prevents the senior guys from doing them back to back. For commuters, it basically llimits them to one per commute. Plus, the trip must start and finish on the same calentar day, so it must not fly past midnight of your time zone. These rules would allow a west coast or east coast pilot use the same rules. I could see a commuter getting something like this:

Day 1: 4 Leg 7+30 trip
Day 2: 4 Leg 7+30 trip
Day 3: 2 Leg 11+00 transcon turn.

Total: 26 hours.

The pilot is then required to have day off, as he is basically timed out for the next 4 days (30/7 rule) and he gets lots of rest before he does it again. By having the double hours flown rule, you prevent doing them back to back. What you get is the ability to get 75+ hours in 9 days of fllying, lots of rest, no day sleeps and a better and safer quality of life.

The suggestion about guys commuting all night to do one is also prevented by the requirement to have double the hours off after the flight. It defeats the "productivity" advantage of these trips cause you have to take the next day off. Thus making the trip not desirable for day one of a commute, but good for the last day of a commute.

The idea that only the senior guys would get this is crap. If the the rules I outline above are in affect it limits pilots to 3 or 4 per month (one for each commute). Thus you won't get senior guys sucking up 8-10 of these trips and scheduling them back to back. That means they flow down to the more junior bidders. Many of the senior pilots may support the transcon turns, but so do many of the junior pilots. No one of us speaks for the whole group. There are junior and senior pilots that are both for and against this type of change.

I think using the rules I suggest, you make the program safer than the current FARs. As for ALPAs push that it reduces pilot manning is mostly hog-wash. Pilots will still fly the same number of hours per month per pilot as before. Whether you do it 5 hours a day (15 days for 75 hours), 7 hours a day (11 days for 77 hours) or using my proposed schedule and get 76 hours in 9 days. You get safety and productivity all in one package.

Now, if your pilot group doesn't want such work rules, that is up to your pilots and union to put those rules it in your contract. Which is no different that some the industry contracts out there now that are more restrictive than the FARs.

Just my opinon......

FNG

Common sense way of looking at it? From who's perspective? Management will look at it in a different way than you and I do. We know when we get tired. When they get tired, they leave the office at 3pm for drinks at Bennegins. Who is funding this study again? Management according to Blue Juice. From their perspective, we should be working for a lot less pay and 6 days a week. You know that to be true. That is why MOST of us have unions, to actually fight for us. Has ALPA done a great job lately? Nope. Will Prater bring in a new style. Hopefully. And don't be soooo worried about a "bad light" on JB. Everyone gets it. Don't pretend your poop don't stink. We all stink. (although I use Right Guard and Polo cologne---I smell FANTASTIC)

Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Chronic Jetlag]

wake up

ALPA will NEVER let them in now. Trying to ruin the industry at every turn. Too Funny.

You assume JB wants ALPA on the property! Wake up, I'm pro union, pro labor but I'm not pro ALPA. As a former ALPA member in good standing, I would rather have other choices besides ALPA.

 

[Mamma]

ALPA will NEVER let them in now. Trying to ruin the industry at every turn. Too Funny.

Ease up fellas. I think Sacko means ALPA is trying to ruin the industry at every turn. I think he is still wrong but he is entitled to his sophmoric opinion. Hey Sacko, great job with your prolific statement! By the way, please explain what is "too funny." That one went over my head.

 

[Jonny Sacko]

Ease up fellas. I think Sacko means ALPA is trying to ruin the industry at every turn. I think he is still wrong but he is entitled to his sophmoric opinion. Hey Sacko, great job with your prolific statement! By the way, please explain what is "too funny." That one went over my head.

That also doesn't surprise me. Way too funny.

 

[PCL_128]

Uh what? The ALPA convention that just ended in LAS included a session that was dedicated to recruiting Jetblue.

Nice try.

There wasn't a session related to Jet Blue at the BOD in LAS (other than a brief mention of this ridiculous 8-hour exemption), but ALPA would certainly like to organize Jet Blue at some point in the future. ALPA would like to represent pilots at all airlines eventually.

 

[Frank Lorenzo]

ALPA would like to represent pilots at all airlines eventually.

I'm in!

They've done a hell of a job representing management's interests these past few years.

I have never seen an organization able to get pilots organized so fast to bend over and vote "yes" for every concessionary agreement thrown in front of them.

Thanks ALPA!

 

[AKAAB]

Sorry to tell you, but ALPA doesn't have a chance at JetBlue, but that's not to say there won't be an eventual organizing of the pilots. I think you'll see something like SWAPA emerge down the road.

Now, just to throw out a thought experiment, could SWAPA enlarge it's scope to become a larger union outside of just Southwest? LCCPA, anyone? I think the vote would be pretty easy to predict if that was ever a possibility.

There, you have your topic, talk amongst yourselves...

 

[Big Beer Belly]

Everyone seems so "against" the productivity. Not lets take a common sense look at it. Now, which is more tiring, flying 4 legs and hitting the "high risk" take off and landing phases twice 4 times or flying two leg and only hitting the high risk phases of flight twice?

You cut the T/Os and Landings in half. Which do you think is safer?

Ah ... by your logic then ... why not extend a 2-man crew to 12 hours flight time with a single takeoff and landing? Surely this would be even LESS fatiguing with a single "high risk" takeoff and landing!

BBB

 

[CaptBud330]

I guess I just don't understand

Let's assume you have a 9am departure from JFK-BUR. You usually have a 1 hour prior show. Lets just say you live in Jackson Heights so you would need to leave the crash pad at say 7:15 to get to the employee lot and catch the bus assuming there is no trafic on the LIE. So, you blast at 9am and your 20 in line . You finally launch at 9:30 and your on your way. Somewhere over the divide, you deviate for wx and make your way south over LAS toward BUR. The wx in BUR is 100 over with 700 rvr. So now you hold for an hour. You finally block in at 1:00pm PST.
Now the cleaners get on and help the crew tidy up and restock the Bus. The pax board and your ready to head back East at just say 1:45 PST. No real traffic at BUR so the gear is up at 2:00pm. Winds are fairly light so it looks like if you don't spare the horses, it's about 5+40 going home. JFK is a little tied up with international departures so again, its just a little hold of say 20 min. You block in at 10pm EST. A 30 min debrief brings you back on the employee bus for your ride back to the crash pad.
Now tell me how safe it is with a 13 hour duty day to do an out and back to the left coast? You guys are either animals or just gluttons for punishment.
Yeah, you go guys. That kind of schedule and you'll be in ICU for coronary problems by the time you turn 50.

 

[B6Driver]

There wasn't a session related to Jet Blue at the BOD in LAS (other than a brief mention of this ridiculous 8-hour exemption), but ALPA would certainly like to organize Jet Blue at some point in the future. ALPA would like to represent pilots at all airlines eventually.

Well, because of this, ALPO will never be on the JetBlue property

 

[B6Driver]

Let's assume you have a 9am departure from JFK-BUR. You usually have a 1 hour prior show. Lets just say you live in Jackson Heights so you would need to leave the crash pad at say 7:15 to get to the employee lot and catch the bus assuming there is no trafic on the LIE. So, you blast at 9am and your 20 in line . You finally launch at 9:30 and your on your way. Somewhere over the divide, you deviate for wx and make your way south over LAS toward BUR. The wx in BUR is 100 over with 700 rvr. So now you hold for an hour. You finally block in at 1:00pm PST.
Now the cleaners get on and help the crew tidy up and restock the Bus. The pax board and your ready to head back East at just say 1:45 PST. No real traffic at BUR so the gear is up at 2:00pm. Winds are fairly light so it looks like if you don't spare the horses, it's about 5+40 going home. JFK is a little tied up with international departures so again, its just a little hold of say 20 min. You block in at 10pm EST. A 30 min debrief brings you back on the employee bus for your ride back to the crash pad.
Now tell me how safe it is with a 13 hour duty day to do an out and back to the left coast? You guys are either animals or just gluttons for punishment.
Yeah, you go guys. That kind of schedule and you'll be in ICU for coronary problems by the time you turn 50.

Well, your post makes for a nice and scary bedtime story but was not what we were attempting to do.

 

[Longhorn]

Well, because of this, ALPO will never be on the JetBlue property

Agreed....While I think that in time a union will make its way on the property, I do not think ALPA will ever step foot here.

 

[G4G5]

You can argue about the validity of the flying all you want. What I take exception to is the article, FBJ2 and G4G5''s attempts to suggest that JetBlue did something illegal or unsafe by doing a little inhouse FAA APPROVED reserarch. The feds knew about this. They approved it and participated in it. Any attempt by someone inside the beltway or safely ensconced in OKC to say otherwise is simply a typical bureaucrats attempt at covering his own ass. If they don't like what happened they should take it up with the FSDO or POI that approved it. JetBlue did nothing wrong.

So, the night watchman at the FSDO on Rockaway Turnpike know about it so it must be Ok. Right?

The article CLEARLY states that the folks in charge did know anything about it. Once again, if the local FSDO grants approval it must be Ok. Right?

We as professional aviators KNOW that their is a correct way and a process to go through if we want to change any of the CFR's. Jet Blue DID NOT follow that process. They stopped at the first person who agreed with them instead of going through the chain of command. If the FSDO POI said it was OK to fly past 60 you would have done that too?

 

[G4G5]

It wasn't illegal or noncompliant. It was done with the specific approval and cooperation of the FAA representative responsbile for JetBlue's operation. The feds may have a question regarding delegation of authority within their ranks, but JetBlue sought and got permission from their point of contact. How was JetBlue supposed to know whether or not the POI was operating within the scope of his/her office? For every thing else JetBlue wants do do they start by corresponding with their POI. Why should this be any different? If the POI overstepped his office, his boss and you can take it up with him. It doesn't get any easier than that, unless of course you're trying to twist the truth to meet your agenda.

"How was JetBlue supposed to know whether or not the POI was operating within the scope of his/her office?"

Please, that's like asking a state trooper if it's OK to do 75 on this stretch of highwat today. "We just want do do an experiment". That Trooper doesn't have the authority to grant the approval any more then a Principal Operations Inspector does. Hence the term INSPECTOR ant not DIRECTOR.

The mgt at B6 is RETARTED if they think a simple field approval would suffice on a rule violation. They knew they wouldn't get approval and tried to pass of a fast one and know because the WSJ found about we are getting idiots coming on here saying lines of BS like "we had approval"

Yeah, from someone who didn't have to power to grant it.

 

[airborn]

G4G5,

not defending Jetblue, but surely you must realize that some of your brethren are flying G5s for many an hour over 8 crossing all kinds of ponds. Why don't we here your outcry for the safety of their passengers. Is there something I am missing here?? ??? ?

 

[G4G5]

Here's some flambait.....

This is just another move by legacy carriers worried by B6 success. They fork out dough to some of their contacts to bring out this story in hopes of tarnishing B6's image with the FAA and the public. Wouldn't be a bit surprised if some union had something to do with this also.

Is it that far-fetched????? Think about it.

Not sure if the Legacy carriers would care, the bad PR is enough but the concept of ALPA doing it on their own is not all that far fetched

 

[G4G5]

G4G5,

not defending Jetblue, but surely you must realize that some of your brethren are flying G5s for many an hour over 8 crossing all kinds of ponds. Why don't we here your outcry for the safety of their passengers. Is there something I am missing here?? ??? ?

Have you ever seen the inside of a G5? We have a dedicated crew rest area, fully reclinable seat, TV, Tunes, the works. We follow FAA approved 135 duty regs and add a relief pilot when required. So, I am not really sure where you are going with this.

 

[G4G5]

If the FAA thought that it was so wrong, then why were there no fines levied against the carrier? Just wondering??

Because it has never been on the cover of the WSJ, now that folks know, do you actually think that the FAA can let it just pass by without doing a thing?

 

[G4G5]

The FSDO doesn't write the FARs, he enforces them. He does have some wiggle room, but obviously he doesn't have the authority to create his own regulations. JBLU management should have known better, but they were obviously more focused on their own agenda. Luckily the adults at the national level finally got wind of what was happening and they apparently are none too happy with the cavalier attitude of both JBLU management and the FSDO they entrusted to ensure JBLU's compliance with the FARs.

The FSDO doesn't have wiggle room, they are there to INFORCE the regs NOT help you re-write them to your likeing. The FAA doesn't have local branches set up just so folks can come in and change whatever FAR they don't like and despite what some may think, that's not the job of a POI. He is an INSPECTOR nothing more, nothing less.

No, the NPRM process is in place and a proper chain of command has been established for those who wish to dispute the regs (just ask the folks who are trying to go to age 65, try doing that with just local POI approval) B6 mgt choose to ignore it.