Response Time

[gunfyter]

FOOTNOTES1. See, e.g., Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 60 Fed. Reg. 65951, 65959-61, 65976 (1995); Notice of New Task Assignment for the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), 63 Fed. Reg. 37167, 37167 (1998). The term "rest," again without definition, is used in several other regulations establishing flight crew rest requirements for larger and scheduled carriers, see 14 C.F.R. ?? 121.471(b), 135.265(b) (2000) (9 to 11 continuous hours in the 24-hour period preceding completion of a flight assignment); id. ?? 121.471(d), 135.265(d) (one uninterrupted 24-hour period weekly); the term appears to be used interchangeably among these regulations.

2. Pertinently, the FAA notice says that the crewmember must be "free . . . from present responsibility for work should the occasion arise." 64 Fed. Reg. 32176, 32176 (1999). By contrast, in the duty-to-be-available scenario, it is much less clear that the crewmember has a "present responsibility for work" since the assignment can be declined.

3. The proviso is unusual (compare the Hobbs Act, 28 U.S.C. ?? 2341-51 (1994 & Supp. II 1996)), but reviewing courts have often read the Hobbs Act and like statutes as containing an implicit "good cause" exception, see American Gas Ass'n v. FERC, 912 F.2d 1496, 1514 (D.C. Cir. 1990); RCA Global Comms., Inc. v. FCC, 758 F.2d 722, 730 (D.C. Cir. 1985).

4. See also Letter from Donald P. Byrne, Assistant Chief Counsel, FAA, to Frederick G. Pappas, Jr., Director, Flight Services, Midwest Corporate Aviation, Inc. (June 24, 1991) ("[A] rest period must be prospective in nature. Stated another way, a flight crewmember must be told in advance that he or she will be on a rest period for the duration required by the regulations. In addition, a rest period must be free of all restraint. However, the Agency's interpretations hold that receipt of one telephone call or beeper call does not constitute a violation of a rest period provision. Moreover, a flight crewmember in a rest period must be free of present responsibility for work should the occasion arise.").

5. Interestingly, "rest period" is defined in section 135.273(a), a different section of the same subpart as the regulation at issue, added in 1994 to govern flight attendants in air charter operations. 14 C.F.R. ? 135.273(a) (2000); 59 Fed. Reg. 42663, 42663 (1994). It is there defined as "the period free of all responsibility for work or duty should the occasion arise," the very language used in the 1999 notice.

6. Compare Letter from Donald P. Byrne, Assistant Chief Counsel, FAA, to Frederick G. Pappas, Jr., Director, Flight Services, Midwest Corporate Aviation, Inc. (June 24, 1991) ("Does a pager check during a 24 hour standby period interrupt crew rest? . . . tandy does not constitute crew rest. The pager check does not interrupt crew rest because crew rest is not taking place."), with Letter from Donald P. Byrne, Assistant Chief Counsel, FAA, to B. Stephen Fortenberry, Evergreen International Airlines, Inc., (undated, in response to a letter dated October 12, 1989, with respect to section 121.471(d)) ("Is telephone standby in a hotel or at home 'duty'? No, not in the sense that it produces the need for the rest period required by section 121.471(d).").

7. The example given by the FAA brief (slightly corrected) is of a pilot who goes off duty at midnight on Monday night, wakes on Tuesday at 6:30 a.m. and would normally go to sleep again at 11 p.m. If the pilot is subject to recall on two hours' notice after 10 a.m. on Tuesday, conceivably he could be called at 10 p.m. on Tuesday for a flight at 12:30 a.m. on Wednesday at which point he will have been awake for 18 hours already, unaware that sometime during that period he should have gotten some sleep.

 

[gunfyter]

I know that was a lot to read through but...

It clearly shows that RESERVE... or holding pilots responsible for being contactable with the Duty to report should the occasion arise... IS not Rest.

The FAA brief filed in FEDERAL COURT says that is the Rule now!

Not some future rule... It is the LAW right now.

The Notice FAA gave in 1999 was not a new rule or new interpretation... FAA claims they have Always held this to be the case but whe notice was simply a notice that ENFORCEMENT of the Rule is coming.

Apparently this has escaped the attention of many POIs in the 135 on-demand community.

But it has not escaped the attention of the Industry as evidenced by this case filed by AVIATORS. A Band of THIEVES trying to avoid obeying the Regulations. And similarly the ARC committee that is NOW lobbying FAA to get a New 135 Rest Regulation published that will be more favorable to their cause.

Notice how the 135 On Demand industry represented here by AVIATIORS complained bitterly that FAAs enforcement was not FAIR because No Such enforcement or rule applies to the Fractional Industry. Well guess what... The Fractional Rules have finally been published and the REST RULES and RESERVE rules are exactly what AVIATORS does not want in Part 135. Will it now be FAIR if 135 on-demand has LESS RESTRICTIVE reserve and rest rules compared to Fractional operators?

This Band of Thieves is going DOWN....

Once again, If you can read, thank a teacher... if you can read while enjoying 10 hours of rest free from the responsibility of having to report on a moments notice for a popup 135 charter flight -- thank a Netjets TEAMSTER pilot.

Because it was a former Executive Jet Aviation MEC members letters to the FAA that forced them to begin to enforce these Regulations!

 

[pilotyip]

Wow! there is alot of letters. Now lets assume this stuff really happens, as you seem to assume it will happen and all 135 operators have adopted this crew rest policy. Now to meet the immediate demands of the customers who pay us so we can pay the pilots. We have to cover 24 hours a day. We call Crew A who was released at 2300 last night and is fully rested at 0900 the next day. We tell them go into rest at 1200 today we want you to come into the building and stand 10 minute launch hot crew at 2200 tonight. Therefore, duty starts at 2200. How much sleep is this crew going to get between 1200 and 2200? 2-3 hours without drugs? Now they get trip at 0001 to fly MMHO and back, they can do it they have 12 hours of duty remaining. They get back home at 1200 the next day. They flew a full legal trip, but they have only slept 2-3 hours in the last 30 hours. Is that a legal and fully rested crew? They certainly are acccording to the rules you say are will be in effect. Does it address the problem of interrupted sleep patterns no? It is the nature of the business, changing schedules is hard on your body.

 

[spngbobsqrpilot]

sounds like a new wave of hiring is coming.....

 

[pilotyip]

Absolutely hiring is coming

Did not you hear about the coming 2007 hiring boom that will start in June of that year. All signs are there, operators lowering competitive minimums, furloughees being recalled creating jobs, column inches in Trade-A-plane wants ads going up. No shows for interviews and ground school. Job are appearing much faster now than two years ago and it is only going to continue to increase until 2011. I tell you all the signs are there.

 

[gunfyter]

3 hours of sleep is better than ZERO HOURS isn't it?

Anyway if the Certificate holder is truly concerned about Safety and having a rested crew... maybe such an assignment should not be issued! The FAA is not forcing you to do so if you are concerned about the Crew's Rest.

As an example, Our company limits Duty to 10 hours if the Duty period begins between 2300 and 0400 local time.

 

[Grizz]

GF -

These bottom feeder 135 outfits get around the rule by stating that pilots can always turn down a trip. That changes the ruling from the "Duty-To-Report" category to the "Duty-To-Be- Available." The reality is that if they turn down a trip, they can and will be terminated. I lost a job at Berry Aviation over a scenario not unlike this because I refused to break the FARs.

It would be interesting to see a pilot that got canned at a job like this go after the company in court. They would either have to admit their policy effectively was in violation of the FARs or they fired the employee without cause.

I'm just glad I'm not in that part of aviation any longer.

 

[gunfyter]

ALL they have to do is hire more pilots. Of course it puts you at a competitive disadvantage unless everyone does it at the same time.

The 135 Charter industry has kicked and screamed for years that Fractional Providers were at a competitive advantage since they could operative under the less restrictive provisions of Part 91. Now that Fractionals will likely go to all 135 operations... and the POIs in the Fractioonal Industry are enforcing the Reserve and Rest rules...

This will make the Fractionals the LARGEST single 135 Operators. And I don't think they will stand for FAA enforcing these rules on them without complaining that the competition -- On_demand Charter company's are not complying.

So I don't think enforcement of the rules will have to wait that 5 years predicted by the ARC Band of Thieves.

 

[rajflyboy]

This brings up a Good Question:

What is considered Part 135 and What is considered Part 91 ??

Fractionals have always skirted this issue somehow.

Part 91 flights had to be owner flights for years and years and years. The owner/family or business had to be the Pax on the flight. Anything else was considered Part 135.

Now.............here comes the fractionals. The owner is rarely ever on the actual airplane that he owns part of. So????? Its basically a Part 135 flight in most cases. How did the fractionals pull this off?? I have no clue.

Now finally 91K clears up this "Clowdy" issue. On a 91K flight the crew has to announce to the Pax that "Owner" so and so has operational control of the aircraft. I guess thats the FAA way of saying...........yep... you guys have been running Part 135 flights as 91 flights for years!!

 

[414Flyer]

One outfit I flew for used the "happen to get ahold of you" excuse.
They got the pilot pagers, and put the bills in the pilots name. So therefore according to the companies POI, the pilot supplied their own means to be reached. Of course the pilots were to submit the bills for reimbursement, and also of course you were paid for each day that they could happen to get ahold of you.

But they also ran two clocks, a duty and a rest at the same time. They started a duty clock on you when you reported to dispatch you arrived, and then they also started a rest clock when you got back. if any more flights came up within time for you to finish within duty times from that first flight, then you were on duty the whole time. If it had been 10 hours since you got back, then it was all rest time.

It was looking backwards to see if it was duty or rest after an assignment, not something you knew in advance. you didnt know following a flight if you were resting, unless it had been a long flight using up most of your duty.

 

[pilotyip]

121 rules

Actually we should go to 121 rules, then if a crew does not fly they only need 8 hours rest and then they are good for 16 hours. Plus you can do drop and add, break duty to extend the day. 121 gives all kinds of flexibility for scheduling that 135 and 91K do not give.

 

[gunfyter]

Its OK with me if we fly 121 rules. Scheduled 135 has reduced rest rules too.

Give me a flight schedule so I know when I start and what my trips will be.... where I will be overnighting etc..

I am more than happy to fly 121... You still can't call me when I am in rest and Reserve is still not rest.

 

[bluepost]

It is all about common sense. In a 24 hour day you need 10 hours you can count on and PLAN AHEAD on to ensure that you are rested. How well do you sleep when you know the phone can ring at anytime and you have to answer it?

This was the intention of the rules when they were written but the scumbag bottom feeders abused it so long it became common practice...now the whole one level of safety motto...and now as before, just because it is legal doesn't mean it is safe...

The airlines had to hire more crews to cover the "new" reserve requirements and 135 will too. If you have a 2 person crew for your aircraft it will not be available 24 hours a day for 135.

 

[pilotyip]

Still flew exhausted

The crew rest that gunguy says will become industry standard will not prevent crews from operating outside of a schedule that allows them to properly rest. The rules have nothing to do with being rested. I flew scheduled 121 cargo, I knew my schedule a month in advance. Nightly run BLD-PIT-DAY-MEM-IAH in an L-188. I still flew exhausted. Start 0200 at DAY ended IAH 0900, out of IAH at 1900, into BLD 0600, out of BLD 2300. Then into IAH 0900 again, 6.5 hours of flight time, standup over day, not legal rest, but a duty break, out of IAH 1900. Drop add all night into BLD 0600, out of BLD 2300 repeat again into DAY 0200, release to go home and assume a sleep at night schedule for four days before going back to being up all night. I was always tried with a messed up sleep pattern, but I was 100% legal as approved by the FAR’s and my ALPA contract.

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

Its OK with me if we fly 121 rules. Scheduled 135 has reduced rest rules too.

Give me a flight schedule so I know when I start and what my trips will be.... where I will be overnighting etc..

I am more than happy to fly 121... You still can't call me when I am in rest and Reserve is still not rest.

I ain't flying 135 no more, but this whole thread brings up one question. Are you saying that if the company calls the pilot to tell him of a flight that he will be needed for on the next day, would that mean they have interupted his rest period? Also, from what I read here, no one on reserve could ever fly a full 14 hour duty day. Even if they just went on reserve, it would have eaten into the 14 hours. Is that correct? How will this affect our 91 ops?

Ace

 

[gunfyter]

Well it just goes to show... just because its legal does not make it safe.

Whats your point ... that we need even more stringent regulation?

Nothing prevents a company from using the available scientiffic data and common sense to devise a crew schedule that prevents fatigued crews.

My point is that 135 operators are scheduling pilots in violation of the EXISTING REGULATION. Now if you say the FAR is not clear enough... I say that these operators have plenty of opportunity to have it made clear.

Just write the Chief Counsel... But the reality is they do not want to know the truth as long as they can get away with doing things as they are done now.

Another reality is this... Even if I am not tired I do not want to expose myself to Flight Violation by ignoring the Regulation because it is inconvenient or expensive for management.

 

[gunfyter]

I ain't flying 135 no more, but this whole thread brings up one question. Are you saying that if the company calls the pilot to tell him of a flight that he will be needed for on the next day, would that mean they have interupted his rest period? Also, from what I read here, no one on reserve could ever fly a full 14 hour duty day. Even if they just went on reserve, it would have eaten into the 14 hours. Is that correct? How will this affect our 91 ops?

Ace

Yes reserve eats up available duty time.

Its not what I say... its what the FAA Chief Counsel says in a brief filed in Federal Court and the 1st Circuit Court that denied Aviators petition.

It does not affect 91 operations. If anything if it will drive up the cost of charter maybe that means the decision to maintain in-house 91 flight department will be more cost effective.