Results of ARC rewrite for Flight and Duty (135)

[roaf3]

Does anyone have any information when the ARC rewrite was going to be implemented? There was supposed to be a rewrite to specifically address FAA 135. 267.

We have CP who still thinks you can be at home on call all day and then call you at 6pm for a 10 hour duty day! Arent' the old days gone !!

Thanks.

 

[pilotyip]

Who is ARC?

 

[svcta]

This may be better answered in the "135" forum. It's been years since I flew 135, I don't remember specifics about duty times. I hope you're right, though. Too many operators have been getting by too long on the backs of tired pilots.

 

[roaf3]

Aviation Rulemaking Comittee: Joint effort between industry and the FAA

 

[NorskAir]

Hopefully the ARC will come out the new duty regulations soon to make this less of an grey area. I have heard maybe sometime late this year.

It might help if you have your CP read FAR's explained, especially page 135-183, FAA Chief Counsel Opinions

" The agency has interpreted "duty" as including actual work for a certificate holder or present responsibility for work if the occasion should arise"

"The agency has interpreted provisions substantively identical to FAR 135.263(b) to the effect that a flight crewmembers receipt of one telephone call from his air carrier employer during a required rest period does not violate a regulation such as FAR 135.263(b)

At my current operation we work on the basis that "on call" is not rest, so they cannot keep us on call all day and then give you a flight late that night.

We asked the companys aviation lawyer about the issue and he indicated he certanly would not want to try a case with an accident/ incident if the company had pilots on call 24/7.

 

[LXJ31]

Hopefully the ARC will come out the new duty regulations soon to make this less of an grey area. I have heard maybe sometime late this year.

It might help if you have your CP read FAR's explained, especially page 135-183, FAA Chief Counsel Opinions

" The agency has interpreted "duty" as including actual work for a certificate holder or present responsibility for work if the occasion should arise"

"The agency has interpreted provisions substantively identical to FAR 135.263(b) to the effect that a flight crewmembers receipt of one telephone call from his air carrier employer during a required rest period does not violate a regulation such as FAR 135.263(b)

At my current operation we work on the basis that "on call" is not rest, so they cannot keep us on call all day and then give you a flight late that night.

We asked the companys aviation lawyer about the issue and he indicated he certanly would not want to try a case with an accident/ incident if the company had pilots on call 24/7.

Come on now! Thats just crazy talk. Does it say anything about commuting and travel not local in nature?

 

[WMUSIGPI]

We are not considered on duty at my company until activated for a flight. We do 12 on 12 off shifts during the week to be called but the 14 hour duty day doesn't start til the phone rings. Weekends is one crew for the entire weekend. Also the compnay's interpretation is if our customer calls for a weather check then decides not to fly the trip we are not starting the 14 hour clock. Even as flexible as they interpret the rules we still are short staffed....

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

The whole on-demand cargo industry, which constitutes multiple tens, if not hundreds of companies, all use the 24 hour on call system.

You can be on call indefinitely (I know a guy who was just #1 on call for about 60 hours until he got a trip) until you come in, then you start your 14 hour duty day which can be extended indefinitely if you were originally scheduled to complete your trip within 14 hours.

cliff
YIP

 

[pilotyip]

We can always go to 121 supplemental crew rest in the 135 business, the feds would approve it in a heartbeat. This way I call you up, tell you I have a trip, then canx the trip and put you on a duty break for up to 6 days (one in 7 thing) where you are on call all the time.

 

[gunfyter]

Might want to read this

http://www.law.emory.edu/1circuit/aug99/99-1888.01a.html

and this

http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200205/01-1027a.txt