|
For decades, ALPA has
demanded “One Level of
Safety” for the simple
reason that all pilots
are created equal and
that all safety
regulations should
follow suit. Yes, it’s
absolutely true that the
new FAA flight- and duty-time rule is a
significant improvement
over the antiquated
rules established three
decades ago. But, noticeably, one
glaring aspect of the
rule was the inclusion
of a “cargo carve out.” ALPA is not at all
satisfied with this
outcome and will
continue to work diligently
with Congress, the
International Federation
of Air Line Pilots’
Associations, and the
International Civil
Aviation Organization to
advocate for flight- and
duty-time regulations
that are based on
science and that include
cargo carriers.
 ALPA fought
vigorously to include
cargo operations in the
new regulations; but at
this point, cargo
operators have convinced
the government that the
costs to them to
implement the new rule
do not justify the
increased level of
safety the new rule
provides.
“ALPA is disappointed
that cargo operations
are being held to a
lesser standard in these
new FAA rules,” said
Capt. Lee Moak, ALPA’s
president. “We will
continue to fight for
the same safety
standards for all types
of flight operations and
across the airline
industry. A pilot is a
pilot, and science shows
that fatigue affects all
pilots independent of
the type of operation.”
ALPA fought
vehemently against the
carve-out by engaging in
grassroots efforts with
Calls to Action,
blitzing Capitol Hill
and conducting hundreds
of meetings with ALPA
pilots in uniform, and
visiting the Office of
Management & Budget on
multiple occasions with
FedEx pilot
representatives. ALPA’s
representatives and
staff, who worked for
years on this rule,
share the frustration
and discouragement of
our cargo members.
To be clear, ALPA was
pitted against a very
strong cargo lobbying
group that was able to
convince the
administration that the
cargo carriers could not
afford and would go out
of business if included
in the new science-based
rule, despite being the
most profitable sector
of the airline industry.
One could make a very
valid argument that in
this example, the
administration did send
a message that it
believes in
safety—unless it’s
convinced by an
industry-developed cost
analysis into believing
safety costs too much.
Clearly, this goes
against our long-held
and scientifically
proven belief that there
should be one level of
safety in regards to
pilot fatigue. This is
unacceptable on many
levels: from the naivety
of the Executive Branch
to an irresponsible
decision-making process
to the overall lack of
transparency.
“ALPA will not
concede or back down
from finishing the work
that we started,” Moak
continued. “This FAA
rule is a significant
improvement in passenger
operations, and ALPA was
instrumental in moving
our government to
implement the new rule
after a half century.
But we cannot rest until
our cargo members are
afforded the same level
of safety.”
The next steps: Our
fellow cargo pilots
deserve better. We are
going to start by
contacting Atlas, FedEx,
UPS, and the other cargo
airlines to push them to
do the right thing and
comply. The new FAA rule
does not preclude cargo
airlines from
voluntarily following
and implementing these
new regulations.
We will keep this
topic alive on the Hill,
just as we have done
with other cargo-related
issues. One Level of
Safety cannot, and will
not, be a hollow
statement. While we did
not prevail in ensuring
that cargo carriers are
included in this new
scientifically-based
rule now, we will keep
the pressure on. In that
endeavor, we will need
to work together.
The new FAA pilot
flight and duty rule
brings much-needed,
science-based
improvements in the
following areas:
• Minimum rest is 10
hours, which begins when
the crew is released
from duty. This is
designed to ensure an
8-hour sleep
opportunity. The crew
will be required to
notify the company if
the rest break needs to
be extended to achieve
the 8-hour sleep
opportunity.
• Thirty-hour rest in
168 hours (7 days),
which, in most cases,
will ensure one
physiological night’s
rest and likely a
calendar day.
• Block limits are
actual, not scheduled,
so pilots are not
pressured to fly more
than the limits due to
unforeseen
circumstances.
o Block hour table in
new FAR 117:
|
Time of
start (home
base)
|
Maximum
flight time
(hours) |
|
0000-0459
|
8 |
|
0500-1959
|
9 |
|
2000-2359
|
8 |
• Flight duty period (FDP)
has been defined and
limits are based on when
you come to work and
conclude when your last
assigned action has been
completed—the FDP is
adjusted based on
late/early shows.
• Cumulative fatigue
protections are measured
in terms of both flight
hours (e.g., 100 block
hours in any 672
consecutive hours) and
in terms of duty
performed (e.g., 60
flight duty period hours
in any 168 consecutive
hours).
• Reserve rest
requirements are
included for all
operations, not just
domestic—this is the
first time that reserve
provisions have ever
been in a regulation.
Long and short call are
not defined as duty, but
are accounted for in
maximum FDPs. Airport
standby/reserve is
treated as duty.
• Deadhead time is
included as FDP.
• There are rest
requirements and
provisions for split
duty.
• Duty extensions for
unforeseen circumstances
are limited and can be
done only with
concurrence of the PIC.
Tighter reporting
requirements will be
mandated for the
certificate holder if
limits are exceeded.
• Augmentation limits
are based on the quality
of the onboard rest
facility, which will
encourage adequate rest
facilities. The quality
of the rest facility
will apply to all
augmented operations,
not just those over 12
hours of flight time.
• Introduces requirement
for operators to
implement fatigue risk
management programs (FRMS).
As announced
yesterday, the new FAA
rules must be fully
implemented no later
than two years following
official publication in
the Federal Register.
This posting should
occur within the next
week.
The reason for the
two-year implementation
is to give the airlines
time to develop approved
FRMS programs and modify
scheduling and bid
software. Additionally,
the new rule will
require extensive
contract review and
negotiations by many of
our MECs. Specifics
regarding implementation
details and time lines
are expected from the
FAA in the near future.
Look for another
FastRead tomorrow
with illustrations of
how the new rule
improvements compare to
the current regulations. |
