New FAA rules....tidbits

[Jetjockey]

Not going to happen. All this will be looked at, then the ATA will lobby. They will say that these rule changes will cause airlines to go bankrupt. There is NO WAY they could hire and train enough pilots to comply in two years, much less 180 days.

Or god forbid, recall furloughed pilots! Bring them all back, and then some.

 

[b707guy]

I think the -121 supplemental operators MAY be able to get themselves exempted. I hope not!!!

My first thought upon reading the list was to wonder how all the majors would finagle the system to operate under supplemental rules.

Some operations, particularly overnight freight with long hub sort hours, would need some relief from those rules as presented. We'd also very likely see an end to reasonable hotels that are 15-30 minutes away and start being stuck in the amenity-less dumps just off the airport property.

 

[CapnVegetto]

Or god forbid, recall furloughed pilots! Bring them all back, and then some.

If these rule changes happen, there is going to be a LOT of recalls and a mini-hiring boom. Example, a buddy of mine at CAL called crew planning, worried about the possible upcoming furlough, and they are already looking at this. The news he heard was that if this rule change happens, not only will there be no furlough, and not only will they have to recall all 147 furloughs immediately, but they will have to hire about an additional 300.

This change will be GREAT for the pilots.....it'll provide some light in the darkness, and possibly create some new jobs. If it happens EVERYBODY will be recalling and/or hiring. Regionals, Majors, EVERYBODY. I'm hoping it happens for that reason. Let's get some guys back and get some more jobs out there!!

 

[ackattacker]

If these rule changes happen, there is going to be a LOT of recalls and a mini-hiring boom. Example, a buddy of mine at CAL called crew planning, worried about the possible upcoming furlough, and they are already looking at this. The news he heard was that if this rule change happens, not only will there be no furlough, and not only will they have to recall all 147 furloughs immediately, but they will have to hire about an additional 300.

This change will be GREAT for the pilots.....it'll provide some light in the darkness, and possibly create some new jobs. If it happens EVERYBODY will be recalling and/or hiring. Regionals, Majors, EVERYBODY. I'm hoping it happens for that reason. Let's get some guys back and get some more jobs out there!!

I agree completely. However the other side of the coin is that there is always the possibility of a financially shaky carrier not being able to absorb the cost of employing more crew members and going completely T.U.

Nevertheless I welcome the change. Lets hope its for real.

 

[DontFeedTheBear]

I agree completely. However the other side of the coin is that there is always the possibility of a financially shaky carrier not being able to absorb the cost of employing more crew members and going completely T.U.

Nevertheless I welcome the change. Lets hope its for real.

There is no doubt that this would put some financial burden on carriers. The good thing is that it would effect ALL carriers. With no competitive advantage all airlines will have to pass this on to the customer.

And yes! SWA will be impacted too, and maybe a little more than others. These rules may become more restrictive as to the number of legs in a duty period. So maybe even some hiring there!!!

Yogi

 

[jmreii]

If these rule changes happen, there is going to be a LOT of recalls and a mini-hiring boom. Example, a buddy of mine at CAL called crew planning, worried about the possible upcoming furlough, and they are already looking at this. The news he heard was that if this rule change happens, not only will there be no furlough, and not only will they have to recall all 147 furloughs immediately, but they will have to hire about an additional 300.

This change will be GREAT for the pilots.....it'll provide some light in the darkness, and possibly create some new jobs. If it happens EVERYBODY will be recalling and/or hiring. Regionals, Majors, EVERYBODY. I'm hoping it happens for that reason. Let's get some guys back and get some more jobs out there!!

The carrier I work for has a plan in place to eliminate service, shrink service, and to contract out service to international carriers.

 

[HHH]

Example, a buddy of mine at CAL called crew planning, worried about the possible upcoming furlough, and they are already looking at this. The news he heard was that if this rule change happens, not only will there be no furlough, and not only will they have to recall all 147 furloughs immediately, but they will have to hire about an additional 300.

Please be very, very certain of the credibility of your source. Latest from "official" channels (i.e. CALALPA, crew planning, CAL mgt., etc.) is furloughs WILL happen in the Fall. CAL mgt. postures that these new rule changes are "staffing neutral".

Don't shoot the messenger; just passing along what I heard.

 

[Ben Franklin]

CAL mgt. postures that these new rule changes are "staffing neutral".

Exactly. they'll just get more Captains to fly in the right seat and put out the VJM memos for everyone else. The open time WILL get covered by the company saviors... JUNIOR and senior alike.

Sincerely,

B. Franklin

 

[ExAF]

FAA vs Company

Commutting was my first question to him. He flatly said it was discussed but they know there is absolutely no way to control or monitor it. He said no rules on commuting.

Just because the FAA doesn't make rules on commuting doesn' mean the company won't make it's own rules.

 

[Browntothebone]

My first thought upon reading the list was to wonder how all the majors would finagle the system to operate under supplemental rules.

Some operations, particularly overnight freight with long hub sort hours, would need some relief from those rules as presented. We'd also very likely see an end to reasonable hotels that are 15-30 minutes away and start being stuck in the amenity-less dumps just off the airport property.

We operate under both domestic an flag rules. Our current contract limits us to just 11 hours max scheduled duty. Our contract also prohibits our company from putting us in amenity-less dump hotels. Your concerns might apply to your operation and other supplemental 121 cargo haulers, but not ours.

 

[NEDude]

If the ATA fails to kill this through lobbying, does anyone forsee them lobbying for a government bailout similar to the auto industry? The government changing the rules and increasing costs on an already financially strapped industry is a pretty good argument IMHO.

 

[Jetjockey]

Hey Brownonmybone...............why is it you never post on cargo board? For some supposed big shot UPS driver, you have nothing to say there? Your just a big poser, just like instructordoosh, pokemyhole, and the long list of other board trolls.

 

[CapnVegetto]

There is no doubt that this would put some financial burden on carriers. The good thing is that it would effect ALL carriers. With no competitive advantage all airlines will have to pass this on to the customer.

And yes! SWA will be impacted too, and maybe a little more than others. These rules may become more restrictive as to the number of legs in a duty period. So maybe even some hiring there!!!

Yogi

This hits the nail on the head. Ticket prices will HAVE to go up, because EVERYBODY will be affected. There will be no competitive advantage when this happens.

I see recalls happening and maybe even some hiring......it's simple math, you HAVE to have additional people because EVERYTHING on the schedules are going to change. No more standup overnights. No more reduced rest. No more 14-16 hour days. No more 9 hour rest periods. No more additional flying after redeyes. No more 4 to 5 hour airport appreciation sits. On the bright side, it will force the airlines to get off their asses and schedule more efficiently and effectively.

As far as CAL goes, God only knows. Hell, 6 months ago everyone was saying all recalls back in the fall with possible hiring. $hit....they even sent out letters to people in the 'hiring pool'. Now they're talking more furloughs. Management saying that these rule changes are 'staffing neutral' is complete bull$hit......I don't buy it for a second. Simple, 5th grade math. At the very least, the furloughs will be coming back if this happens....I'd bet my left nut on it.

 

[Green Banana]

If this goes as far as public lobbying or hearings, we need to organise a demonstration of pilots in uniform holding coffee cups and wearing sleep masks!

 

[CapnVegetto]

Please be very, very certain of the credibility of your source. Latest from "official" channels (i.e. CALALPA, crew planning, CAL mgt., etc.) is furloughs WILL happen in the Fall. CAL mgt. postures that these new rule changes are "staffing neutral".

Don't shoot the messenger; just passing along what I heard.

Well, right now, that is the plan. When my friend talked to crew planning, they said they were expecting about 200 to 250 furloughs effective in September, but that was assuming that this rule change doesn't happen. Simple 5th grade math says that CAL mgt. is COMPLETELY full of $hit saying that these possible rule changes are 'staffing neutral'. Remember, ya'll are negotiating for a contract, and mgt. wants everything to look as bad as humanly possible so they can push a piece of $hit contract on you. They can't come out and say that there might be recalls and possible hiring, because then they couldn't use the threat of furloughs to possibly get concessions from you. Doom and gloom is all they've got. If CAL started making a nice profit they wouldn't be able to go to negotiations and give you a sob story about how horrible everything is right now and they need you to accept minimum wage and no work rules so the company might survive.

Realistically, one thing I've learned in my meager 31 years on this earth is that the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. Take about half the doom and gloom the company is spewing and that's probably more along the lines of what it really is.

 

[Max Powers]

This may have a chance of passing because Democrats have the majority in Congress/Senate. Hate to say it boys. I know pilots by nature are republicans.

I have never seen a republican stand up to big business and corporations to help out the little guy and do whats right.

 

[Benjamin Dover]

We operate under both domestic an flag rules. Our current contract limits us to just 11 hours max scheduled duty. Our contract also prohibits our company from putting us in amenity-less dump hotels. Your concerns might apply to your operation and other supplemental 121 cargo haulers, but not ours.

I guess when I'm down at the bar scoping out fat bar chicks and the dudes in the lobby waiting on the van to go fly the night shift in Brown uni's must have borrowed your threads.

Glad things are so awesome there. My neighbor who got displaced from SDF to Anchorage says it's great.

 

[Ty Webb]

And here comes the red vs. blue guys to ruin the thread. Yay.

Another FI phrase is coined

 

[airlinepilot]

Actually I don't think this will impact the SWA pilots very much. Our duty day is already limited to 13 hours scheduled so no big changes. Where we will take a hit is they will need more reserves. The biggest hit to SWA will be our FA's who like to fly as much as possible in a 6 day period. Also their duty day will be very limited compared to what they do now. It's going to happen.....the powers in Congress have told the FAA to fix it.

 

[pilotyip]

Will not create jobs

This change will be GREAT for the pilots.....it'll provide some light in the darkness, and possibly create some new jobs. If it happens EVERYBODY will be recalling and/or hiring. Regionals, Majors, EVERYBODY. I'm hoping it happens for that reason. Let's get some guys back and get some more jobs out there!!

Most likely if it adds to the present pilot list to do the same amount of flying, then that will raise the cost of tickets, which will reduce the number tickets purchased, which will result in fewer flight and fewer Captain and fewer yet F/O's. Like anything that adds cost to an airline, he reduces seats sold. Like many things it will be good for a few and not so good for many more. Or the other side is the same amount of pilots doing less flying, more timer in hotels on road and getting fewer hours per month. Adam Smith figured it out about 240 years ago.

 

[Mamma]

Most likely if it adds to the present pilot list to do the same amount of flying, then that will raise the cost of tickets, which will reduce the number tickets purchased, which will result in fewer flight and fewer Captain and fewer yet F/O's. Like anything that adds cost to an airline, he reduces seats sold. Like many things it will be good for a few and not so good for many more. Or the other side is the same amount of pilots doing less flying, more timer in hotels on road and getting fewer hours per month. Adam Smith figured it out about 240 years ago.

Maybe. Maybe not. You would have to know the breaking point in regards to ticket prices. Would demand sharply fall off if ticket prices went up $10 to pay for this? Based on present load factors probably not. If this caused tickets to go up $100 each, then maybe there is a problem. That being said, I have no idea how much this would add to airline costs but to make the comments you did, you seem to know something.

 

[dtfl]

Not going to happen. All this will be looked at, then the ATA will lobby. They will say that these rule changes will cause airlines to go bankrupt. There is NO WAY they could hire and train enough pilots to comply in two years, much less 180 days.

They'll whine to each other and works something out....tied to the economy lifting, etc....

 

[clippyrip]

My neighbor who got displaced from SDF to Anchorage says it's great.

Anchorage is great.

 

[densoo]

Or the other side is the same amount of pilots doing less flying, more timer in hotels on road and getting fewer hours per month.

From reading the likely model for the new regulation (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP371.PDF), this may polarize the quality of life even more than it is already between senior and junior pilots.

The senior pilots are going to be able to fly 10-hour turns during the day without an IRO under the new rules because the new rules are duty-day driven more than flight-hour driven. If your duty day is less than 13 1/4 hours with a start time between 0800 and 1259, you may be good to go. You could get your entire month's flying done in 7 or 8 days and not spend a night out of the country or out of your own bed (ok maybe not such a great idea). Get up, ATL-SEA-ATL, go home. Not bad.

But there will certainly be some very ugly trips built with this. This section is absolutely the best one in the reg as far as I'm concerned:

17.2 The minimum rest period which must be provided before undertaking a flying duty period shall be:
a) at least as long as the preceding duty period, or
b) 12 hours,
whichever is the greater.
The room allocated to the crew member must be available for
occupation for a minimum of 10 hours.

When your company can schedule block-to-block at 9:45 and regularly and with impunity waives this down to less with the allowance to "catch up" on rest the next night when you don't need it any longer, is unsafe and has been for years. But, it also might drive some very unproductive trips.

When applied to reserve duty (called "standby" in the CAA reg), it is going to drive the manning model to increase the reserve by a huge amount I predict. The rest requirements and duty limitations for reserves are far more stingent in the new reg than the old.

 

[CapnVegetto]

Most likely if it adds to the present pilot list to do the same amount of flying, then that will raise the cost of tickets, which will reduce the number tickets purchased, which will result in fewer flight and fewer Captain and fewer yet F/O's. Like anything that adds cost to an airline, he reduces seats sold. Like many things it will be good for a few and not so good for many more. Or the other side is the same amount of pilots doing less flying, more timer in hotels on road and getting fewer hours per month. Adam Smith figured it out about 240 years ago.

Once again management shows its ineptness. Let's do some 5th grade math and figure this out.....

Continental airlines has over 4,000 departures daily system wide. (source, Wikipedia)

Since most tickets sold are 2-legs, (flight to hub and then to destination), we'll say 2,000 planeloads worth of tickets sold per day.

Again, crude assumptions.....half regional flights (CoEx) half mainline. So 1,000 50 seat planes worth of passengers per day and 1,000 150 seat (on average) planes worth.

CAL is reporting about 90% load factors on flights, so we'll take 90% of those numbers for a rough average. So now we're at 1,000 departures at 45 seats each, and another 1,000 departures at 135 seats each. PER DAY.

So we're sitting at about 135 X 1,000 tickets sold plus 45 X 1,000 tickets sold PER DAY this summer. 135,000 + 45,000 = 180,000 tickets sold PER DAY system wide.

How many days in a quarter? Well, 3 months at 30 days a month average = 90 days.

So we multiply 180,000 tickets sold by 90 days and we get 16,200,000 as a rough guesstimate of passenger tickets sold for the summer quarter.

So, let's do some more math. CAL lost $203 million bucks 2Q. What would happen if all ticket prices were raised by an average of $13 bucks?

16,200,000 X $13bucks = $210,600,000 = ZOMFG ROFLCOPTER WOWOWWOWOW PROFIT OF $7,600,000.

For a fcking $13 a ticket price raise. $13 F-ING dollars.

Get a clue management. $13 bucks. Hell, add some baggage fees and make it $8 bucks. Do you really think that your load factors are going to drop through the basement over $13 F-ING DOLLARS????????

If you do you are idiots. PASS ON THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS TO THE CUSTOMER. It's simple logic. Hell, you've spent the last 100 years trying to figure out a way to screw employees out of every penny you can, why not apply some of that screwing knowledge to your business venture instead of furloughing 147 pilots that will save you at best $10 million bucks in A F-ING YEAR??? (See previous thread for the 5th grade math on that conclusion).

I swear, I should get into management. I could piss away $250 million bucks a quarter just as good as these morons. And I'd get paid good for doing it.

It's so frustrating to read such stupidity.

 

[Lear70]

If this goes as far as public lobbying or hearings, we need to organise a demonstration of pilots in uniform holding coffee cups and wearing sleep masks!

Funny you should mention that. I got this from ALPA today:

[FONT=&quot]ALPA Pilots Needed for FAA “Road Shows”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ALPA president Capt. John Prater served as pilot union moderator in Washington, D.C., Tuesday at the first of 12 FAA “Call to Action on Airline Safety and Pilot Training” road shows. The FAA announced at the kick-off Call to Action event on June 15 that these road shows would be scheduled around the United States and that active line-pilot participation would be solicited for each. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ALPA is fully supporting these events and encourages members—especially those who live in or near participating cities—to attend one or more of the meetings and share their perspective on the subjects raised. The FAA has structured these events to facilitate discussion, which will be moderated by selected labor and airline representatives. ALPA is especially interested in having broad representation and constructive participation from its members at these events.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Call to Action is intended to bring together FAA inspectors, airline management, and pilots to discuss the challenges of improving air carrier management support, screening, hiring, training, professional standards, and mentoring at all Part 121 airlines. The first road show this week included a cross section of approximately 75 aviation professionals and regulators.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot](For more information, please click here.)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Return to top[/FONT]​

 

[Lear70]

Most likely if it adds to the present pilot list to do the same amount of flying, then that will raise the cost of tickets, which will reduce the number tickets purchased, which will result in fewer flight and fewer Captain and fewer yet F/O's. Like anything that adds cost to an airline, he reduces seats sold. Like many things it will be good for a few and not so good for many more. Or the other side is the same amount of pilots doing less flying, more timer in hotels on road and getting fewer hours per month. Adam Smith figured it out about 240 years ago.

Highly, highly unlikely. Pilots and flight attendants just aren't that big of a piece of the CASM pie. About 3%.

In other words, if you DOUBLED the number of pilots required to operate the airline, each passenger would pay $10 more per $300 ticket. HARDLY enough to cancel the flight over or bring more passengers out of the market. More than likely a 20% increase in staffing is more reasonable, so you'd have a $2 or so increase per ticket.

Why always so alarmist about a reasonable increase in ticket price?

Depending on the airline, this will impact some, and some won't be as affected. The difference will come in just how hard they currently push their pilots outside the new limits.

For instance, at AirTran, the whole scheduling operation is held together on bailing wire and duct tape, robbing Peter to pay Paul, just to cover the trips (there aren't enough pilots), without ramping up Reserve Pilot usage so they won't have to pay them more than guarantee. I can guarantee you, if this rule goes into effect, AirTran will be forced to hire at least another 10-15% (130-180 pilots) just to cover the flying.

The regionals who regularly use a lot of CDO's, long duty days, and crap pairings will undoubtedly have to SERIOUSLY hire. If it all happens at one time, hopefully there won't be very many unemployed EXPERIENCED pilots who want jobs.

Too bad it's not coming with a pilot "minimum pay scale".

 

[NEDude]

Once again management shows its ineptness. Let's do some 5th grade math and figure this out.....

Continental airlines has over 4,000 departures daily system wide. (source, Wikipedia)

Since most tickets sold are 2-legs, (flight to hub and then to destination), we'll say 2,000 planeloads worth of tickets sold per day.

Again, crude assumptions.....half regional flights (CoEx) half mainline. So 1,000 50 seat planes worth of passengers per day and 1,000 150 seat (on average) planes worth.

CAL is reporting about 90% load factors on flights, so we'll take 90% of those numbers for a rough average. So now we're at 1,000 departures at 45 seats each, and another 1,000 departures at 135 seats each. PER DAY.

So we're sitting at about 135 X 1,000 tickets sold plus 45 X 1,000 tickets sold PER DAY this summer. 135,000 + 45,000 = 180,000 tickets sold PER DAY system wide.

How many days in a quarter? Well, 3 months at 30 days a month average = 90 days.

So we multiply 180,000 tickets sold by 90 days and we get 16,200,000 as a rough guesstimate of passenger tickets sold for the summer quarter.

So, let's do some more math. CAL lost $203 million bucks 2Q. What would happen if all ticket prices were raised by an average of $13 bucks?

16,200,000 X $13bucks = $210,600,000 = ZOMFG ROFLCOPTER WOWOWWOWOW PROFIT OF $7,600,000.

For a fcking $13 a ticket price raise. $13 F-ING dollars.

Get a clue management. $13 bucks. Hell, add some baggage fees and make it $8 bucks. Do you really think that your load factors are going to drop through the basement over $13 F-ING DOLLARS????????

If you do you are idiots. PASS ON THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS TO THE CUSTOMER. It's simple logic. Hell, you've spent the last 100 years trying to figure out a way to screw employees out of every penny you can, why not apply some of that screwing knowledge to your business venture instead of furloughing 147 pilots that will save you at best $10 million bucks in A F-ING YEAR??? (See previous thread for the 5th grade math on that conclusion).

I swear, I should get into management. I could piss away $250 million bucks a quarter just as good as these morons. And I'd get paid good for doing it.

It's so frustrating to read such stupidity.

I did some of this math on one flight (different company) about a year ago when gas was sky high. The route was getting cancelled due to "high fuel costs" and the "inability to raise prices" to cover the increased costs. Now keep in mind the average load factor for this particular route, for this particular airline, was over 90%. I could do this calculation because the cost of fuel for each station was updated weekly and made availabe to the pilot group.

Anyway, I am not going to get into the math, but the end result was that each passenger would have pay about $15 more per ticket to cover what gas had increased by from one year earlier when the route was supposedly very profitable.

When you break a lot of these numbers down on a per ticket basis, it is really disgusting how many people are losing their jobs, and how much turmoil the industry really is in, over $10-$20 per ticket. I lose my job and some executive get a $20 million dollar bonus because the airline can't raise fares by ten dollars. How sad.

 

[Skywest Pylot]

Most likely if it adds to the present pilot list to do the same amount of flying, then that will raise the cost of tickets, which will reduce the number tickets purchased, which will result in fewer flight and fewer Captain and fewer yet F/O's. Like anything that adds cost to an airline, he reduces seats sold. Like many things it will be good for a few and not so good for many more. Or the other side is the same amount of pilots doing less flying, more timer in hotels on road and getting fewer hours per month. Adam Smith figured it out about 240 years ago.

You sure don't seem very concerned about safety. I say safety first and then let the chips fall where they may. Make no mistake, chronic fatigue is rampant in this industry and should have been addressed years ago. Company Lap Dogs like you are a disgrace to this profession.

 

[DesertFalcon]

yeah until us pilots start greasing congress like the azz hole management does with all the stolen money they rape froma company, it will never change.

It'll be considered "acceptable losses" to have a few accidents.....the profit will outweight the safety issues.

Although safety will be their number one concern, as long as it dont interfere with profits.

Profits, what profits... we'll be lucky if anyone works, as a Pilot, in the next 1 1/2 years. We are going to see drastic changes in the Airline Industry; They're going to have to pay for fuel... that should be fun to watch!