JetBlue in full meltdown mode

[FDJ2]

Problem is, 117 is a dorked up, overly complicated, next-to-impossible-to-fully-comply-with, counterproductive goat-screw of epic proportions.

FAR 117 is a step in the right direction if your priority is having well rested pilots at the controls. If your priority is pushing pilots beyond the point of exhaustion, to save a few bucks, then you might have a point.

 

[n757st]

I wonder how much recently losing 30+ captains to delta recalls played into this?

We have close to 1300 captains, 30 didn't effect them much.

 

[RiddleEagle18]

I wonder how much recently losing 30+ captains to delta recalls played into this?

In this case it didnt. Most of the cnx were actually do to lack of FA's.

Overall there is an attitude of "screw it" with almost every employee group I talked to in the past week. You can only crap on your employees so long before all the good will is gone.

 

[gutshotdraw]

FAR 117 is a step in the right direction if your priority is having well rested pilots at the controls. If your priority is pushing pilots beyond the point of exhaustion, to save a few bucks, then you might have a point.

My priority is rested pilots with a SIMPLE, EASY TO FOLLOW REST RULE.

Minimum rest period is 10 hours behind the door.

No rest period shorter than the preceding duty period, rounded up. 10:30 of duty? 11 off. 11:05 of duty? 12 off. Etc.

Cross more than 3 time zones? Additional hour of rest for each time zone crossed in excess of 3.

Simple. Predictable. Easy to calculate.

Remember, "no operator may assign and no pilot may accept" is the standard. It's ultimately on YOU to comply. Do you know every in and out of the "circadian" limitations? Is it based on YOUR home base time? Your partner's home base time? The airline's home base time? What about when you're international? You need a frickin Cray supercomputer to keep track of it. It's a JOKE.

If they extend this rule to 91K and 135 as some of my misguided colleagues hope, I GUARANTEE our scheduling will violate it left and right because THEY won't be able to figure it out and dozens of pilots will get violated as a result. AND the operation will likely melt down.

 

[livin'thesim]

The biggest problem is the lack of legal-to-start, legal-to-finish.

So many opportunities for crews to get stranded at an outstation.

 

[FDJ2]

My priority is rested pilots with a SIMPLE, EASY TO FOLLOW REST RULE.

Minimum rest period is 10 hours behind the door.

No rest period shorter than the preceding duty period, rounded up. 10:30 of duty? 11 off. 11:05 of duty? 12 off. Etc.

Cross more than 3 time zones? Additional hour of rest for each time zone crossed in excess of 3.

Simple. Predictable. Easy to calculate.

A one size fits all simple approach is nice, but it can ignore human physiology. It's not just how much time you get to rest that matters, but also what the flight duty day look like. Starting at midnight or starting your day at noon are two different scenarios. The same goes for how many flight segments you are expected to operate and whether or not you are flying across multiple time zones. I personally don't find the new rules that complicated. I've got an easy to use Quick Reference Sheet; provided by my union, which I've laminated and placed in my flight bag. Again it comes down to what your goals are. Is it a priority to be simple, predictable and easy to calculate, or to base your regs on the science of human physiology.

 

[gutshotdraw]

A one size fits all simple approach is nice, but it can ignore human physiology. It's not just how much time you get to rest that matters, but also what the flight duty day look like. Starting at midnight or starting your day at noon are two different scenarios. The same goes for how many flight segments you are expected to operate and whether or not you are flying across multiple time zones. I personally don't find the new rules that complicated. I've got an easy to use Quick Reference Sheet; provided by my union, which I've laminated and placed in my flight bag. Again it comes down to what your goals are. Is it a priority to be simple, predictable and easy to calculate, or to base your regs on the science of human physiology.

Based on WHOSE time zone? Yours? Your partner's? The airline's home base?

You flew a leg from Teterboro to Geneva. Now what time benchmark do you use?

After 18 years of worldwide international flying, I can tell you that all that fancy circadian science goes RIGHT OUT THE WINDOW when you land in Singapore. Or Helsinki. Or Santiago.

Jet lag affects everybody differently and just because somebody claims the new rules are based on "science" doesn't mean it works in the real world. Especially in the unscheduled operations world.

 

[michael707767]

FAR 117 is a step in the right direction if your priority is having well rested pilots at the controls. If your priority is pushing pilots beyond the point of exhaustion, to save a few bucks, then you might have a point.

are you kidding me? FAR 117 goes so far beyond anything that was needed its a joke.

 

[igneousy2]

The biggest problem is the lack of legal-to-start, legal-to-finish.

So many opportunities for crews to get stranded at an outstation.

The problem is your contract apparently doesn't properly compensate you if this happens. Getting rid of legal to start was the most important thing the FAA did. I will gladly get stuck at an outstation because in all likelihood the flight was cx, and while I know the company doesn't give a damn if I'm tired, they do care if they have to cx a flight because of te lack of pilots. I'll also take the entire pairing paid at 150% because they didn't get me back on time...cha-Ching.

It seems to me that 117 has taken away the incentive to push the limits. I bet you don't see very many days scheduled to 8:59 flight or 14:59 hours of duty which is what would have happened if legal to start was still valid.

I see some problems with 117 but the elimination of legal to start is not one of them.

 

[scoreboardII]

My priority is rested pilots with a SIMPLE, EASY TO FOLLOW REST RULE.

Minimum rest period is 10 hours behind the door.

No rest period shorter than the preceding duty period, rounded up. 10:30 of duty? 11 off. 11:05 of duty? 12 off. Etc.

Cross more than 3 time zones? Additional hour of rest for each time zone crossed in excess of 3.

Simple. Predictable. Easy to calculate.

Remember, "no operator may assign and no pilot may accept" is the standard. It's ultimately on YOU to comply. Do you know every in and out of the "circadian" limitations? Is it based on YOUR home base time? Your partner's home base time? The airline's home base time? What about when you're international? You need a frickin Cray supercomputer to keep track of it. It's a JOKE.

If they extend this rule to 91K and 135 as some of my misguided colleagues hope, I GUARANTEE our scheduling will violate it left and right because THEY won't be able to figure it out and dozens of pilots will get violated as a result. AND the operation will likely melt down.

This is a great idea, except, you realize the company will find the loophole like this:

Only work 3 hrs of duty? Sure we'll put you in a hotel for guess what, 3hrs. But then, we need you for 3 hrs, and after that we'll put you in another hotel for three more, and then we need you for 6, but you'll be off duty after that so screw you. Total duty only 11 hours, but it took them
18hrs to do it.

 

[scoreboardII]

The biggest problem is the lack of legal-to-start, legal-to-finish.

So many opportunities for crews to get stranded at an outstation.

not just that, worse, get deadheaded for hours beyond FDP.

 

[scoreboardII]

The problem is your contract apparently doesn't properly compensate you if this happens. Getting rid of legal to start was the most important thing the FAA did. I will gladly get stuck at an outstation because in all likelihood the flight was cx, and while I know the company doesn't give a damn if I'm tired, they do care if they have to cx a flight because of te lack of pilots. I'll also take the entire pairing paid at 150% because they didn't get me back on time...cha-Ching.

It seems to me that 117 has taken away the incentive to push the limits. I bet you don't see very many days scheduled to 8:59 flight or 14:59 hours of duty which is what would have happened if legal to start was still valid.

I see some problems with 117 but the elimination of legal to start is not one of them.

No, you wont see the high schedule days, NOR pay. What you will have is a company who can without your approval, extend you two hours, if you decline, at least in our contract, pay is lost. Unless you claim fatigue, then your screwed into a no pay overnight and DH back.

After watching the ramifications this last week, I have complete faith the companies were all in cahoots with the FAA to get them to be able, at no negotiating cost under the guise of a new law, to keep our asses in the seat for many more hours with much less pay.

 

[dontpost2]

Problem is, 117 is a dorked up, overly complicated, next-to-impossible-to-fully-comply-with, counterproductive goat-screw of epic proportions.

Funny, for the vast majority of large airlines in the U.S., 117 has not caused any problems. And for those lucky enough to be working under a good CBA. No problems.

 

[waveflyer]

I agree with FDJ2

117 is a good, positive step in the right direction.

Previous regs were a nonsensical political compromise

 

[doh]

This is a great idea, except, you realize the company will find the loophole like this:

Only work 3 hrs of duty? Sure we'll put you in a hotel for guess what, 3hrs. But then, we need you for 3 hrs, and after that we'll put you in another hotel for three more, and then we need you for 6, but you'll be off duty after that so screw you. Total duty only 11 hours, but it took them
18hrs to do it.

Reread! He said MINIMUM 10 HRS REST BEHIND THE DOOR. No 3 hour rest allowed.