New 1st class medical duration

[a-v-8er]

...and once again the unions will be worthless addressing the once a year medical issue with mngmnt!

Otherwise good news!

 

[FlyAirtran]

Ditto Horizon. Waiting for Sabre to reprogram whatever TRS-80 they run Training Records on. They're having a hard time finding cassette tapes. I offered them some of my old Styx albums.

No thats funny right there, I dont care who ya are. :laugh:

 

[BOX OFFICE]

I would think that airlines would be opening themselves up to quite a bit of liability by demanding medical standards above and beyond those of the FAA if they don't adjust their policy to the new requirements. By doing so, they place the burden of inspection and enforcement upon themselves rather than the governmental agency. Thusly, if an accident occurs and the medical certification comes into question, it is the company that the lawyers will go after. As it is now, if there's a wreck attributed to poor medical condition, the company can point to the FAA and say the pilot met their standards. They will lose that ability.

An example of this was many airlines moving away from "in house" 12 hour bottle to throttle rules and reducing the requirement to the FAA 8 hour rule a few years ago. It was done for liability reasons as stated above because if a pilot showed up above the limit between 12 and 8 hours and flew, then wrecked, the company would have been responsible for not enforcing their own rule. Ford & Harrison led that move.

 

[ReverseSensing]

An example of this was many airlines moving away from "in house" 12 hour bottle to throttle rules and reducing the requirement to the FAA 8 hour rule a few years ago. It was done for liability reasons as stated above because if a pilot showed up above the limit between 12 and 8 hours and flew, then wrecked, the company would have been responsible for not enforcing their own rule. Ford & Harrison led that move.

Figures...:erm:...Horizon has preserved their "unique" culture on this issue too. No drinking within 12 hours of duty, or on the same calendar day as any duty.

Oh, and now we can't use our phones in the cockpit...uh...box office, except for company business. Pfffft.

 

[sweptback]

...and once again the unions will be worthless addressing the once a year medical issue with mngmnt!

Otherwise good news!

What does your contract say about medical standards? Most ALPA contracts are pretty specific that they recognize whatever the FAA has set as the only bar to meet.

 

[shamrock]

I had a nice little rant worked up ripping ASA management for putting out excuses and "we'll try to get this through but don't guarantee anything" garbage but it looks like Scott went and took the wind out of my sails with his latest memo. :angryfire

ASA is advancing all 1st class medicals 6 months for everyone under 40, at least according to his update.

 

[centralpilot]

I had a nice little rant worked up ripping ASA management for putting out excuses and "we'll try to get this through but don't guarantee anything" garbage but it looks like Scott went and took the wind out of my sails with his latest memo. :angryfire

ASA is advancing all 1st class medicals 6 months for everyone under 40, at least according to his update.

It probably didn't hurt that ALPA was all over the previous memo being a blatant violation of the CBA.

 

[WMUSIGPI]

I think at Mesaba it's a matter of the archaic computer systems need to be upgraded for the change, once that's done then they will follow the new rules but until then the computers will keep flagging people based on the old requirements. So perhaps about the time I turn 40 they will have everything sorted out.... (that's about 10 years if you are counting)

 

[Raskal]

I think at Mesaba it's a matter of the archaic computer systems need to be upgraded for the change, once that's done then they will follow the new rules but until then the computers will keep flagging people based on the old requirements. So perhaps about the time I turn 40 they will have everything sorted out.... (that's about 10 years if you are counting)

I'm sorry, but I find that to be ridiculous at the least, malicious at worst. When we get an updated medical we send it in, at some point someone manually puts in the new exam date. So, please, explain to me why even on this archaic system we simply can't have them manually re-enter an expiration/exam date (as they already do every 6 months) so that as the system thinks we expire after six months it will just show renewed for the remainder? Does that make sense?

This is complete BS.

 

[temcgrew]

This is a prime example of why this whole thing is a joke. I have met people that could not walk 50 feet without gasping for air yet they could pass their exam by just going to the same person for 30 years. Most of the time the doc only sees you to have you cough and maybe listen to you breath. Why the hell does that cost $100.

I think it is a crock that all these companies are not accepting the change. Did they give you the "well you are professionals and because of this, we think you should go above and beyond to ensure the safety of our customers. And by the way we are cutting your pay!"

All companies should adhere to the FAR's on this or fork out for the exam. Before this passed, they couldn't get away with forcing 1st class medicals every 3 months or 2nd class every 6 months. Or how about forcing retirement at age 60 instead of 65?

 

[ASA_Aviator]

It probably didn't hurt that ALPA was all over the previous memo being a blatant violation of the CBA.

The company had no idea that this was in the works. Unfortunately, that means that they couldn't comply until they had some sort of technical solution, which apparently they have now.

I don't see why everyone freaked out about this. Of course the company would comply, but you can't expect computer programs to update themselves overnight. CrewTrac automatically removes you from duty if your medical expires. Until that is fixed, ain't nobody flying with a 7 month old 1st class...

(Again, it looks like they have a temporary solution at ASA...)

 

[Flyer1015]

Pinnacle put out a similar memo. Captains still have to get a new medical every 6 months, until SABRE can updated to reflect the new change.

Such BS. Pinnacle management didn't want to spend the money to fix the problem, instead, they claimed they were out of the loophole about this new medical extension ruling.

BS!

 

[sweptback]

The company had no idea that this was in the works. Unfortunately, that means that they couldn't comply until they had some sort of technical solution, which apparently they have now.

I don't see why everyone freaked out about this. Of course the company would comply, but you can't expect computer programs to update themselves overnight. CrewTrac automatically removes you from duty if your medical expires. Until that is fixed, ain't nobody flying with a 7 month old 1st class...

(Again, it looks like they have a temporary solution at ASA...)

It doesn't matter if they have a solution or not, nor that the change took them by surprise. They have to comply per our contract, which is why you saw SH backtrack as quickly as he did on the next email.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

It doesn't matter if they have a solution or not, nor that the change took them by surprise. They have to comply per our contract, which is why you saw SH backtrack as quickly as he did on the next email.

Are you kidding me? If the company is attempting to comply, but cannot immediately due to technological constraints, what do you expect them to do? Unfortunately, it takes time to deal with surprises.

BTW, Scott didn't backtrack, he just said that they had found a work around solution until the software can be fixed. We would have had to wait a reasonable amount of time if a work around solution could not have been found. I bet it will take Sabre no more than a week to update the software.

I don't understand why you guys are so anti-common sense. If you step back, take a deep breath, and realize that the management is not trying to screw you at every turn, you will be much happier.

 

[ReverseSensing]

Turns out Horizon is going to comply manually. It doesn't take a fancy computer program re-write in the short term to do the correct thing and comply with the contract. It just takes a file clerk to manually keep track of the data until the computers are fixed. Gee, what a concept.

Just another case of one idiot Ass Chief Pilot at Horizon making it up as he goes.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

Turns out Horizon is going to comply manually. It doesn't take a fancy computer program re-write in the short term to do the correct thing and comply with the contract. It just takes a file clerk to manually keep track of the data until the computers are fixed. Gee, what a concept.

Just another case of one idiot Ass Chief Pilot at Horizon making it up as he goes.

Unfortunately, that is not true at ASA. No one can fly if they aren't in the CrewTrac system, and CrewTrac won't let anyone fly if their medical is out of date. There is no "over ride" to that sort of de-qualification. So even if a "clerk" notices that the pilot hasn't really de-qualified due to his medical, there is nothing they can do except remove them from the trip.

It is a relatively simple software fix, and there is a temporary work around in place until it is updated.

 

[DoinTime]

Unfortunately, that is not true at ASA. No one can fly if they aren't in the CrewTrac system, and CrewTrac won't let anyone fly if their medical is out of date. There is no "over ride" to that sort of de-qualification. So even if a "clerk" notices that the pilot hasn't really de-qualified due to his medical, there is nothing they can do except remove them from the trip.

It is a relatively simple software fix, and there is a temporary work around in place until it is updated.

There is a simple CrewQual (qualification end of CrewTrac) fix. Everyone effected just needs to have a new certificate inputted in what would have been their due month. For a pilot group the size of PCL thats about 50 manual inputs per month.

Unfortunately for PCL they can either comply with the new FAA standard right now or pay for the unnecessary examinations per our working agreement. The choice is theirs to make.

 

[sweptback]

Are you kidding me? If the company is attempting to comply, but cannot immediately due to technological constraints, what do you expect them to do? Unfortunately, it takes time to deal with surprises.

BTW, Scott didn't backtrack, he just said that they had found a work around solution until the software can be fixed. We would have had to wait a reasonable amount of time if a work around solution could not have been found. I bet it will take Sabre no more than a week to update the software.

I don't understand why you guys are so anti-common sense. If you step back, take a deep breath, and realize that the management is not trying to screw you at every turn, you will be much happier.

It's not a matter of whether I think the company is screwing us or not. It's a matter of them complying with a contract that they agreed to. Let me put it to you this way. Say the company says, due to a problem with our payroll provider we can't pay you on the 15th. We'll pay you both checks at the end of the month, and after they update the software things will be back to normal next month. Our payroll provider sprung this on us at the last possible minute and we have no way of paying people other than through the payroll service.

After all, that wouldn't be a big deal, right? We're still getting paid. Or, would you have a problem with that?

 

[ASA_Aviator]

It's not a matter of whether I think the company is screwing us or not. It's a matter of them complying with a contract that they agreed to. Let me put it to you this way. Say the company says, due to a problem with our payroll provider we can't pay you on the 15th. We'll pay you both checks at the end of the month, and after they update the software things will be back to normal next month. Our payroll provider sprung this on us at the last possible minute and we have no way of paying people other than through the payroll service.

After all, that wouldn't be a big deal, right? We're still getting paid. Or, would you have a problem with that?

I would expect a work around, which is what the company did in this case. They immediately began working on a fix, and one was found. In your example, if there were no immediate fix possible, I would understand, and make arrangements in my life to accommodate it. (In your particular case, it is obviously possible to print checks, but it wasn't clear immediately if it would be possible to fix the problem with a temporary fix or not, so it isn't exactly apples to apples is it?)

What I wouldn't do is start crying foul so quickly, and claiming that the company is trying to screw us, etc. etc.