screwed, again

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

rigpiggy
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2858
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 7:17 pm
Location: west to east and west again

Re: screwed, again

Post by rigpiggy »

phillyfan wrote:Pilots are a lazy bunch of babies. 99% have never put in a full day of work in their entire life. I can always spot the pilot in a crowd. While everybody else if working, he's the guy with his hands buried in his pockets.
You must have spare time to look around then, get back to work
---------- ADS -----------
 
Roar
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 11:14 pm

Re: screwed, again

Post by Roar »

phillyfan wrote:Pilots are a lazy bunch of babies. 99% have never put in a full day of work in their entire life. I can always spot the pilot in a crowd. While everybody else if working, he's the guy with his hands buried in his pockets.

Interesting statistic there Phillyfan, where exactly did you get that gem from? I'm betting you just made it up.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
timel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1209
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:50 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by timel »

Screwed... ?

How many pilots wrote to CARRAC?
How many discussions and ... nothing?

People want NO Canadian pilot association that would represent them, HO NO THEY WILL steal my money, those greedy evil pilots.
Nobody cared to write government when the door was open.

And now what? Surprise people, lobbies do fine work.


http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 7&start=25


For pilots who wish to testify about their fatigue experiences:

CARRAC@tc.gc.ca

Citation:
Hi,
Absolutely, we welcome personal experiences as part of the input we are collecting and have received a few personal testimonies from pilots to date. This email is the correct address and feel free to leave out your employer if that makes you more comfortable.

Regards,

Melanie


Mélanie Drouin
A/Manager, Civil Aviation Regulations Advisory Council | Gestionnaire par intérim, Conseil consultatif sur la réglementation aérienne canadienne
Transport Canada | Transports Canada
Place de Ville, 330 Sparks Street, AARBH
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N5
melanie.drouin@tc.gc.ca
Telephone | Téléphone 613-990-1415
Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by Rockie »

timel wrote:Screwed... ?

How many pilots wrote to CARRAC?
How many discussions and ... nothing?

People want NO Canadian pilot association that would represent them, HO NO THEY WILL steal my money, those greedy evil pilots.
Nobody cared to write government when the door was open.

And now what? Surprise people, lobbies do fine work.


For pilots who wish to testify about their fatigue experiences:

CARRAC@tc.gc.ca

Citation:
Hi,
Absolutely, we welcome personal experiences as part of the input we are collecting and have received a few personal testimonies from pilots to date. This email is the correct address and feel free to leave out your employer if that makes you more comfortable.

Regards,

Melanie
ACPA and ALPA have collectively dedicated years and years of intensive effort along with other employee groups to effect positive change and gotten nowhere. It is pretty unrealistic to think individuals writing in would make any kind of difference.

Our current government especially shares the sentiment of Mr. Phillyfan up there particularly when it comes to unionized employees, and the argument pushed by him and the president of ATAC that it's just lazy pilots trying to work less fits the government's ideology like a glove. Easy sell.
---------- ADS -----------
 
timel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1209
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:50 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by timel »

Maybe you are right Rockie, I guess I am frustrated and you know I really hate this government. I'm popping champagne the day an other party gets elected.

phillyfan wrote:Pilots are a lazy bunch of babies. 99% have never put in a full day of work in their entire life. I can always spot the pilot in a crowd. While everybody else if working, he's the guy with his hands buried in his pockets.

I used to have months where I would work 180 hours average of duty and they would call us for overtime, that would include some days up to 15 hours of duty in the summer with an op spec the company had, flying ifr in a king with no autopilot.

Fatigue did really beat me hard one day, and that is when I became aware of what was "really tired". We were doing a sched medevac and when we came back we got assigned on an other urgent medevac, max stretch 14 hours. No other pilots available.
It was quite a long day with many approaches all at the minimums, ice all over the place, bad day. Woke up early, came back at night, we were ferrying on the last leg back home, adrenaline going down all the sudden, I remember telling myself, if I have an emergency during the rest of the flight, I am not sure my brain will be working enough.

In my opinion the biggest problem is Transport Canada push to reset switch "rest regulations".. It is not enough.
When you work long stressful days, they expect you to drive home, eat, shower, kiss your girlfriend, calm down and sleep the 8 hours, wake up, get brakefast, groom, be there at work, do the planning, file the flight plan, put the catering and takeoff, all of that 9 hours and 15 minutes after you shutdown the engines the day before.


Yes once in a while, ok, crazy long days, got to work hard and help the company and it is fun, I love flying, everytime I go, I love it.
But you work hard the day before, they day after ... few times I had to take naps during the legs, cause I felt too tired and I know guys who told me stories they were falling asleep during the approach in other companies.

So accumulated fatigue is a reality in 703-704, it has nothing to do with being lazy.
I did long vfr day flights, I never felt it had the same impact on fatigue compared to ifr operations.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Last edited by timel on Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
DrSpaceman
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by DrSpaceman »

Redneck pilot,
In your example there is at least 10h of idle time in a crew house between flights. So long you don't even need to split the duty you can reset the duty period!

Also for those saying it would degrade salaries and conditions, it wouldn't. If all companies have the same limitations, the cost of business will increase for everyone equally. The effect will be felt from clients who will pay a little more but who will have an increase in safety in exchange. Sounds like a good deal to me.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by Rockie »

timel wrote:So accumulated fatigue is a reality in 703-704, it has nothing to do with being lazy. I did long vfr day flights, I never felt it had the same impact on fatigue compared to ifr operations.
I hear you and agree completely. 705 operations can be a different type of fatiguing too especially with multiple oceanic crossings, loss of sleep, disrupted circadian rhythms, time zones etc...but fatigue is fatigue. I personally know someone so beaten by accumulated fatigue that he needed six weeks off and medical attention, and I would hazard a guess he isn't the only one out there flying when he shouldn't. "Tiredness" is a fact of life in this business and in reality it's a rare day we don't operate tired rather than the other way around, but it's unfortunately up to us to decide when "tired" becomes "too tired".

There will be no help from this government especially who views any science with suspicion much less fatigue science.
---------- ADS -----------
 
timel
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1209
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:50 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by timel »

Rockie wrote:
There will be no help from this government especially who views any science with suspicion much less fatigue science.

Yes, the only science they know is God created earth in 7 days.

Rockie wrote:
ACPA and ALPA have collectively dedicated years and years of intensive effort along with other employee groups to effect positive change and gotten nowhere. It is pretty unrealistic to think individuals writing in would make any kind of difference.
And like you said ALPA ans ACPA have been dedicated on the topic, our civil servants at Transport Canada just splitted 705 and 704/703 by pushing it aside. It used to be a package deal, the three came together, and my feeling, 703/704 benefited from ALPA and ACPA's work. Not anymore I guess.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by Rockie »

timel wrote:our civil servants at Transport Canada just splitted 705 and 704/703 by pushing it aside
They did so only under political direction, it matters not to them personally what the duty rules are. It has always been political pandering to business interests that keep our duty time regulations the worst in the world.
---------- ADS -----------
 
BDG
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 1:50 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by BDG »

DrSpaceman wrote:
Also for those saying it would degrade salaries and conditions, it wouldn't. If all companies have the same limitations, the cost of business will increase for everyone equally. The effect will be felt from clients who will pay a little more but who will have an increase in safety in exchange. Sounds like a good deal to me.
Sorry, sounds more like a Crock to me.

Don't all company's, more or less, have the same limitations already? What is to stop the outfits that already work their pilots into the dirt, just hire more guys and pay even less.
(then we'll have to start yet another thread on how guys who work for low wages are killing the industry)

Please explain from an owners perspective, how to run a business that has just incurred an increase of (ballparking) 30% in labour costs, without having to decrease wages, and still remain in the black?

It just takes one outfit to pay their guys peanuts (I think we've seen many do it already) in order to out bid for clients.

If you think the allure of Safety is enough to keep customers, let me remind you of a saying. "Money Talks!"
The choice between Safe and Safest usually comes down to the difference in price.

I've seen in the last 20 years Safety become a buzzword for the creation of a cottage industry. How many of us had even heard of a Safety Officer before 10 years ago? If you don't think its a farce, ask anyone who's had to put on fall arrest gear to go up a stepladder to change a light bulb. The general industry standard for fall protection is FOUR FEET.


What ever happened to common sense, and personal responsibility? Do we not need it any longer because we have Safety?

Its getting to the point where we will need an approved procedure to wipe our collective buttocks, complete with an 8 hour course and signed copies of completion in our training folders, with yearly recerts.


Finally,

How will forcing every company to conduct business and operations on a model that will benefit of one group, benefit everyone as a whole?

I know a lot of guys who like their 10 and 5's and their 2 on / 2 off, schedules. Some even took the job specifically for the schedule. But hey its ok, they don't matter because they don't work for peanuts, and/or don't willingly schlep for minimum CAR's rest?

If you don't like how your company is pushing you out the door when you feel like a beaten rug, have you done something about it? Gather the other pilots and Union up, strike for better schedules, contact the labour board, or seek greener pastures.

Don't solve your problems by creating new ones for me.

(Just so you don't have to ask. Yes, It's late, I'm hot, and I'm getting old and crotchety- BDG)
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by Rockie »

BDG wrote:If you don't like how your company is pushing you out the door when you feel like a beaten rug, have you done something about it? Gather the other pilots and Union up, strike for better schedules, contact the labour board, or seek greener pastures.
In the early 90's ALPA thought as you do - that this was a scheduling issue - and that pilot groups should negotiate for better scheduling rules. They came around eventually and realized it was not a scheduling issue but rather a safety issue, and that the only way to fix it was through regulation. Since the regulator in Canada and the US are responsible for public safety in transportation this ball belongs squarely in their court. In keeping with that analogy our regulator hasn't exactly dropped the ball - they refuse to even pick it up.
BDG wrote:Don't solve your problems by creating new ones for me.
Being an overheated crotchety old person up way past his bed time is pretty serious I know, but really?
---------- ADS -----------
 
fish4life
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2405
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by fish4life »

BDG wrote:
DrSpaceman wrote:
Also for those saying it would degrade salaries and conditions, it wouldn't. If all companies have the same limitations, the cost of business will increase for everyone equally. The effect will be felt from clients who will pay a little more but who will have an increase in safety in exchange. Sounds like a good deal to me.
Sorry, sounds more like a Crock to me.

Don't all company's, more or less, have the same limitations already? What is to stop the outfits that already work their pilots into the dirt, just hire more guys and pay even less.
(then we'll have to start yet another thread on how guys who work for low wages are killing the industry)

Please explain from an owners perspective, how to run a business that has just incurred an increase of (ballparking) 30% in labour costs, without having to decrease wages, and still remain in the black?

It just takes one outfit to pay their guys peanuts (I think we've seen many do it already) in order to out bid for clients.

If you think the allure of Safety is enough to keep customers, let me remind you of a saying. "Money Talks!"
The choice between Safe and Safest usually comes down to the difference in price.

I've seen in the last 20 years Safety become a buzzword for the creation of a cottage industry. How many of us had even heard of a Safety Officer before 10 years ago? If you don't think its a farce, ask anyone who's had to put on fall arrest gear to go up a stepladder to change a light bulb. The general industry standard for fall protection is FOUR FEET.


What ever happened to common sense, and personal responsibility? Do we not need it any longer because we have Safety?

Its getting to the point where we will need an approved procedure to wipe our collective buttocks, complete with an 8 hour course and signed copies of completion in our training folders, with yearly recerts.


Finally,

How will forcing every company to conduct business and operations on a model that will benefit of one group, benefit everyone as a whole?

I know a lot of guys who like their 10 and 5's and their 2 on / 2 off, schedules. Some even took the job specifically for the schedule. But hey its ok, they don't matter because they don't work for peanuts, and/or don't willingly schlep for minimum CAR's rest?

If you don't like how your company is pushing you out the door when you feel like a beaten rug, have you done something about it? Gather the other pilots and Union up, strike for better schedules, contact the labour board, or seek greener pastures.

Don't solve your problems by creating new ones for me.

(Just so you don't have to ask. Yes, It's late, I'm hot, and I'm getting old and crotchety- BDG)
If a company finds out they need 30% more engineers as an example it would actually cause wages to go up... It's simple supply and demand if the number of jobs went up with the same number of pilots then wages would have to increase. As for the business owner point of view I think this will actually help the good operators because they aren't running their guys into the ground unlike the sketch bag ones.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Meddler
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 3:18 pm

Re: screwed, again

Post by Meddler »

"a company finds out they need 30% more engineers as an example it would actually cause wages to go up..."

I don't thinks so.

Bottom line is if your company doesn't treat you well now, they probably won't because of a new rule.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
AOW
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:23 pm

Re: screwed, again

Post by AOW »

This is a complex topic, I posted my comments on the NPA that I submitted in another thread, some of which may have been addressed by this version in Gazette 1, which is, as far as I can tell, a very tamed down version of the NPA.

The whole idea of FDT rules are to strike a balance. At the extremes, flight crews are obviously the best rested if they are not allowed any duty time at all, and are worst rested if they are not required to have any time free from duty. The operator wants to get the most work out of their people, while the crews generally want something in between. Most people would probably love to collect a paycheque for doing nothing, however they may eventually get bored. And if your paycheque is proportional to credit hours or duty hours or some similar system, you want to work enough hours to get decent pay, without working too hard. As some have said, if the new rules mean you have to work more days for the same pay, that may be seen as a negative, especially if you didn't feel that your job was too much work under the current rules. I have worked many 14 (and 15) hour duty days in my career. Some didn't feel that long, while others were definitely a LONG shift! But in all cases, I won't fly unless I am safe to do so, and I believe that I am a reasonable judge of my own mental preparedness.

In some operations, a 14 hour duty day makes sense for a number of reasons. If you work a 14 hour day, even if you only receive minimum rest, you still end up on the same "rhythm" of start times and duty periods (work for 14, rest for 10, and you're starting at the same time you did yesterday). Getting 24 hours of rest between flights sounds great at first, until you realize that in one day you have completely swapped from days to nights, nights to days, or whatever. I find this harder on the system than doing consistent 12-14 hour days, with 10-12 hours of rest.

I understand why they chose not to include 703/704 from the new regs, and if you read the entry in Gazette 1, there is a plan to change the regs for these operators in the future. I know that there are a variety of types of operation under 705, but I might argue that 703 is the most diverse in terms of the types of operation covered by it. A supercub carrying 1 passenger to a fishing camp, and a King Air carrying 9 passengers in a scheduled service both fall under 703, but are vastly different operations. Both of these situations, however, can handle a shortened duty day by simply employing more pilots to take over half way through the day, assuming they return to a base or hub location where another pilot/crew can be based. The ones who are going to have a bigger problem with shorter duty days are the charter pilots (generally 703/704) who typically fly a customer some place, wait around while the customer completes their business, then flies them home. This is a case where a split-duty day can be used, but since you then need extra rest equal to the extension used, this crew may not be able to operate the next day, once again meaning more crews are required to do the same work. The operations that presently have crews working non-stop for 14+ hours, they will need to rethink their operational plan. Once again, an additional crew to finish the day would likely solve this.

The bottom line, there is going to be a need for more pilots. If the airlines continue hiring (especially if they find themselves in similar circumstances and need more crews to complete their existing operations), there will be more pressure on the 703/704 operators who lose their experienced pilots to the shiny jets of 705. This is probably good from the perspective of new pilots looking for a first job, but from the perspective of the air operators, it is a real problem. Especially when customers impose experience restrictions on the flight crews that are allowed to transport their people, the 703 operators will have a hard time finding qualified crews. The pressure to try to retain the experienced pilots is likely going to lead to better pay, and depending on the final wording of the regulations, the CARs may already provide a better schedule, so $$$ are all that is left to try to entice the experienced people to hold off on moving to 705. Unfortunately, no amount of money is going to stop some people from jumping ship to go fly a Q400, etc., but it may deter some people.

So in order to pay the experienced pilots better, where does a company get this money? If they need to double their number of flight crews to do the same flying they have been doing, and try to offer better salary to the people they can't afford to lose, does that mean that entry level pay is going to go down? That plan has worked for Jazz, or so it seems... In all likelihood, that is not enough to cover the shortfall, so fares are going to have to increase.

So now my problems comes: the operators who blatantly break the rules! If a company already routinely violates the CARs, ignores the existing FDT regulations, etc., why would they bother to adhere to the new rules? I imagine myself in the owner's shoes, and can imagine being pretty pissed off as my company who has had to raise fares to afford to comply with the new rules starts to suffer, as the customers all start going across the field to "Fly By Night Airlines", who mysteriously haven't had to change their fares, and now offer my customers a 25% price advantage! Who is going to enforce these regs?

I agree that FDT needs to be improved at all levels of Canadian Aviation. These new regulations are a step in the right direction; the NPA had some good ideas in it, although I did not agree with all of the proposed changes. We need to find the right balance, and need to make sure that the rules are followed.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DrSpaceman
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am

Re: screwed, again

Post by DrSpaceman »

I agree with AOW, no amount of regulation is going to matter unless they enforce it.

Redneck, Labor cost increase of 30% isn't a bad thing, you can keep your bottom line if you increase the bill to your clients, which if they have to fly, will continue to do so. Again, the rules will change for everyone, so prices will be competitive. Right now we are way behind the rest of the developed world on this. I don't understand all the reluctance to the inevitable.
---------- ADS -----------
 
teacher
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2450
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:25 pm

Re: screwed, again

Post by teacher »

timel wrote:Maybe you are right Rockie, I guess I am frustrated and you know I really hate this government. I'm popping champagne the day an other party gets elected.

phillyfan wrote:Pilots are a lazy bunch of babies. 99% have never put in a full day of work in their entire life. I can always spot the pilot in a crowd. While everybody else if working, he's the guy with his hands buried in his pockets.

I used to have months where I would work 180 hours average of duty and they would call us for overtime, that would include some days up to 15 hours of duty in the summer with an op spec the company had, flying ifr in a king with no autopilot.

Fatigue did really beat me hard one day, and that is when I became aware of what was "really tired". We were doing a sched medevac and when we came back we got assigned on an other urgent medevac, max stretch 14 hours. No other pilots available.
It was quite a long day with many approaches all at the minimums, ice all over the place, bad day. Woke up early, came back at night, we were ferrying on the last leg back home, adrenaline going down all the sudden, I remember telling myself, if I have an emergency during the rest of the flight, I am not sure my brain will be working enough.

In my opinion the biggest problem is Transport Canada push to reset switch "rest regulations".. It is not enough.
When you work long stressful days, they expect you to drive home, eat, shower, kiss your girlfriend, calm down and sleep the 8 hours, wake up, get brakefast, groom, be there at work, do the planning, file the flight plan, put the catering and takeoff, all of that 9 hours and 15 minutes after you shutdown the engines the day before.


Yes once in a while, ok, crazy long days, got to work hard and help the company and it is fun, I love flying, everytime I go, I love it.
But you work hard the day before, they day after ... few times I had to take naps during the legs, cause I felt too tired and I know guys who told me stories they were falling asleep during the approach in other companies.

So accumulated fatigue is a reality in 703-704, it has nothing to do with being lazy.
I did long vfr day flights, I never felt it had the same impact on fatigue compared to ifr operations.
AMEN MY FRIEND!!!!!!! 10 hours rest from shutdown to check in? I was lucky to get 5-6 hours sleep by the time we groomed the plane, finished paper work, drove home, showered, ate, chilled out enough to sleep, woke up had breakfast, drove back to the airport for 1 hour prior to engine start.

Even now after an early morning pairing that is 4 consecutive 4am wake ups by day 4 I am bagged. Altitude, vibration and less than ideal sleep amounts are cumulative.

I've said it before, just because you fly a different type of plane doesn't mean you need different sleep. We are all human and should be treated as such. We are awake during the day and asleep at night. That is our normal. Sun up awake, sundown sleep. Anything out side of this should be treated with caution.
---------- ADS -----------
 
https://eresonatemedia.com/
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
User avatar
AOW
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 2:23 pm

Re: screwed, again

Post by AOW »

teacher wrote:10 hours rest from shutdown to check in?
This is another sore point for me. It is supposed to be 10 hours free from duty, and you aren't free from duty while you're still completing the paperwork, grooming the plane, etc. My company has always stuck with 10 hours free from duty, starting when you leave the airport, which is often up to an hour after shutdown, sometimes even more! The current regulations say that the employee must be given the opportunity to attain 8 hours of prone rest. IF you actually follow what that is saying, then 10 hours is really the minimum "time free from duty" possible to get that 8 hours of rest. That works well for me, since I live only a few minutes from the airport, and in a small enough city that everybody else is similarly close (and since our crews work "on call", everyone lives less than 30 minutes from the airport, most quite a bit closer). So in your case, Teacher, where you live far enough away from the airport that you need 12 hours free from duty at your home base, in order to gain 8 hours of prone rest, then the current regulations TECHNICALLY should give you more time off than the proposed flat 10 hours.

But on the other hand, I have heard of operators who believe that 8 hours from wheels down to check in is legal within the current regulations, so as I mentioned earlier, regulations mean nothing if nobody complies with them!
---------- ADS -----------
 
upintheair_
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 332
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2015 4:40 pm

Re: screwed, again

Post by upintheair_ »

Then you have operators like SkyScare. 8 hours of rest? Here, have 5.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
single_swine_herder
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 627
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 9:35 pm

Re: screwed, again

Post by single_swine_herder »

The part of this thread that nobody seems to address is what I see as the mistaken concept that if costs go up by 30% on labour in a 702, 703, or 704 where the pilot staff is a large segment of total staff component, that these costs can merely flow through to the customer without negatively affecting the gross revenues by pricing the product out of the market relative to other modes of transportation .... or no transportation at all for that matter. Doing business via video conference as just one example.

From a customer perspective .... they are interested in obtaining the lowest price .... period. Even that lowest price may be a real stretch to obtain. Canada's safety record is already at a very high standard, and the public perception of being sold on the concept of the increased fee increasing an already very high level by a non-measurable, intangible level is going to be a hard sell.

Should things be improved in some operations that flog their crew members to exhaustion? Of course.

Is the customer pocket endlessly deep and refill with money as if we are discussing a wishing well? No.

The poster who conveyed that regulations and laws are totally worthless unless they are enforced nailed it..... and AvCanada being what it is, the very first time that an AOC holder and/or pilot is taken to task over a regulation violation, there will be page after page of how TC is being heavy-handed, violating somebody's God-given and Constitutional Rights, are clowns that couldn't make it in industry, etc.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Strobes
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 86
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 8:29 pm
Location: Somewhere making money
Contact:

Re: screwed, again

Post by Strobes »

My humble opinion echoes what a few people here have expressed.

If you are tired, report fatigued and refuse work.
If your company presses on, there are a crap-ton of media and government agencies that would love to hear your story.

In the end, you are the last line of defense when it comes to safety. If I am fatigued, ops/crew sched is but a quick 30 second phone call away.

I personally want the 14 hours duty rules to stay at all levels. Because I want those opportunities for long, high-credit days, and long flights - selfish, I know, but makes me more marketable. However, I make sure I am safe to operate those flights first and foremost.

Personal responsibility. Nobody has it anymore, so TC thinks it needs to legislate good safety rules.


But if we must have the new rules, then it makes a ton of sense that 702-703 operators get relief from it at first. Can you imagine what will happen to them when 704 and 705 operators need to hire 25-30% more pilots? 705 pilots may not realize this, but many 703-4 operators hurt badly when Encore started sucking up every pilot on the northern streets...

This whining from the ACPA and other unions smells rotten. Who benefits financially the most from 30% more pilots? Just sayin'
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”