The other side of new duty regs?

Discuss topics relating to airlines.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore

Message
Author
co-joe
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3256
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:33 am
Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME

The other side of new duty regs?

#1 Post by co-joe » Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:20 pm

Okay, so we've heard lobby groups like ATAC say that the new regs will cost companies money, and make Canadian operators less competitive.

We've heard pilots say that they don't feel protected by the current rules. I'm in this category, and routinely go to work with a fatigue level that I feel is unsafe.

What's the other side of the coin? Devil's advocate here, what will the down side to pilots be, if they aren't able to work duty times as long based on start time?

Will this mean we will simply be forced to work more days to make up the hours?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
JohnnyHotRocks
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 868
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:18 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#2 Post by JohnnyHotRocks » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:04 pm

Shorter days with fewer days off is my guess
---------- ADS -----------
  

ant_321
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:43 pm

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#3 Post by ant_321 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:10 pm

Yes. Where I work there are a lot of long turns. Many of these won’t be legal assuming the new regs ever get rolled out and look something like we are expecting. So it will make the 9 day a month, home every night, sched impossible. The junior guys will be spending a lot more time away from home working more, shorter days.
---------- ADS -----------
  

altiplano
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2956
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#4 Post by altiplano » Mon Nov 05, 2018 5:27 pm

American pilots somehow manage without trans-con turns.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#5 Post by DanWEC » Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:54 pm

Our company told us the same- working more days to make up the difference, you know, since it's somehow our problem.
---------- ADS -----------
  

marakii
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 8:59 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#6 Post by marakii » Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:06 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:54 pm
Our company told us the same- working more days to make up the difference, you know, since it's somehow our problem.
So basically, they won't hire more just make the present pilots fly more days per month.

Well that doesn't sound good, so what are we saying 20 to 25 days a month on the job?
---------- ADS -----------
  

ant_321
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:43 pm

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#7 Post by ant_321 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:18 pm

marakii wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:06 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:54 pm
Our company told us the same- working more days to make up the difference, you know, since it's somehow our problem.
So basically, they won't hire more just make the present pilots fly more days per month.

Well that doesn't sound good, so what are we saying 20 to 25 days a month on the job?
Pilots are typically paid for flight time. Typically credited approx 80 hrs a month depending on the airline. At some places guys were doing 9, 9ish hour credit days a month and having 21 days off. That will be difficult or impossible under the new rules. The places where guys works 18-20 days a month probably won’t see a big difference in their overall schedule.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
jpilot77
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 471
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2008 5:11 pm
Location: North of YMX

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#8 Post by jpilot77 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 10:39 pm

The US carriers use augmented crews for transcons and North Atlantic flying. Just the way it’s legal to use 3-4 pilots to do long and ultra long haul flights now in Canada.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Welcome to Redneck Airlines. We might not get you there but we'll get you close!

goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#9 Post by goingnowherefast » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:28 am

Management saying that they'll just work more days, more overnight hotel stays are just being lazy. Sure they'll have to tweak the network, but for the most part it's just fear mongering. 80 credit hours is roughly 160 duty hours, and is 16 days at 10 hours. Working 25 days a month and only getting 80 credit hours is just inefficient scheduling. Fortunately there are also duty time limits to avoid that crap.

The way I see it is operators brought the new rules on themselves. The current flight and duty times are limits, but some operators are treating them as targets. A 14 hour day is legal, and perfectly safe if used rarely. The problem is operators are making 14 hour days the norm, combining it with minimum rest periods and expecting all to be okay. Operate well within the limits, only reaching the limits for exceptional circumstances, and everybody is happy. Routinely operate to the limits and something will break. In this case it's more strict rules.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#10 Post by DanWEC » Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:50 am

Exactly.

Also, IMO The temper tantrum that ATAC is throwing about the duty regs is very short sighted.
Improving conditions should be part of their strategy to improve enrollment and alleviate the growing shortage down the line. It is, after all, not a shortage of "pilots" but a shortage of people who are choosing this industry over many others that offer better conditions and roi.

There's also that dubious clause that allows companies to circumvent the restrictions if they can prove fatigue isn't an issue. I wouldn't worry too much about the Transat guys losing their long turns since they actually want them. It's mostly the regionals who are getting their schedules hammered these days that need the rest.
---------- ADS -----------
  

seven-oh-nooo
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:35 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#11 Post by seven-oh-nooo » Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:58 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:50 am
Also, IMO The temper tantrum that ATAC is throwing about the duty regs is very short sighted.
From the meetings I've sat in I would say panic is a better term than temper tantrum. It's surreal to watch multiple adults fight back tears over the implications to their livelihood if a flight crew shortage is made worse. I've been able to hang on but it isn't fun and it's not what I signed up for.
goingnowherefast wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:28 am
The way I see it is operators brought the new rules on themselves.
Every operator has the option to implement shorter duty days or better schedules and every pilot has the opportunity to shun those who don't. Every good operator also has a scumbag operator next door who pays less, works their staff harder, and cuts whatever corners they can get away with yet somehow they still have a line of applicants out the door and half way around the block who don't give a shit about any of that.

Anyways, the change to the regs was rejected at whatever gazette stage it got to and before it can be reconsidered it will have to be substantially changed. It would be awfully nice if pilot reps, ATAC and transport could all get together without a fight and sort something out for the next attempt but I won't be holding my breath.
---------- ADS -----------
  

snowcone
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 7:02 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#12 Post by snowcone » Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:54 pm

Narrow body crews at AC are capped at 16 work days....they will have to find another way for those crews.
---------- ADS -----------
  

goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#13 Post by goingnowherefast » Tue Nov 06, 2018 2:54 pm

Some of the worst operators are finding it harder and harder to find pilots. I know of one place that shut down already for a lack of pilots.

With jobs this plentiful, anybody with some experience is leaving for better lifestyle and working conditions.
---------- ADS -----------
  

digits_
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1520
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#14 Post by digits_ » Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:01 pm

seven-oh-nooo wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:58 pm
[Anyways, the change to the regs was rejected at whatever gazette stage it got to and before it can be reconsidered it will have to be substantially changed. It would be awfully nice if pilot reps, ATAC and transport could all get together without a fight and sort something out for the next attempt but I won't be holding my breath.
Do you have a source for that? Or is it a logical conclusion because it is still not published?
---------- ADS -----------
  

bobcaygeon
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 518
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#15 Post by bobcaygeon » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:26 pm

snowcone wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:54 pm
Narrow body crews at AC are capped at 16 work days....they will have to find another way for those crews.
For now they are. Its been more days in the past and ACPA used the WJ agreement as an example (16 working days). You're assuming the new WJ CA will stay at 16 days and the ACPA won't cave when the company comes back to the table. Ask a WJ pilot just how confident they are the ALPA agreement will be "wonderful"

Look at the "Rouged" agreement signed in 2014 and AC's profit now. (Calin bank account thanks you for being a team player ##7figurebonus. ACPA had better than CARs duty days but gave it up for $$$, counting on TC to bail them out ie Please legistale what I couldn't negotiate. ACPA has sold out their young repeatedly and will do it again. What version of pension are they on now? 3 or 4. The DB lasted for 70 years.

There may be a pilot shortage but shittier conditions at AC didn't shorten the line up before and it won't now either.
---------- ADS -----------
  

bobcaygeon
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 518
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#16 Post by bobcaygeon » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:30 pm

digits_ wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 3:01 pm
seven-oh-nooo wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:58 pm
[Anyways, the change to the regs was rejected at whatever gazette stage it got to and before it can be reconsidered it will have to be substantially changed. It would be awfully nice if pilot reps, ATAC and transport could all get together without a fight and sort something out for the next attempt but I won't be holding my breath.
Do you have a source for that? Or is it a logical conclusion because it is still not published?
It didn't get to Gazette 2 because it was rejected at the next step post Gazette 1. It won't even get to back to the next step to be reviewed without changes, never mind accepted and move on to Gazette 2. aka go directly to jail, do not collect $200.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Lightchop
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 10:03 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#17 Post by Lightchop » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:47 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:54 pm
Our company told us the same- working more days to make up the difference, you know, since it's somehow our problem.
They'll just be forced to finally increase the productivity of the pairings.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Lightchop
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 10:03 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#18 Post by Lightchop » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:49 pm

marakii wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:06 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:54 pm
Our company told us the same- working more days to make up the difference, you know, since it's somehow our problem.
So basically, they won't hire more just make the present pilots fly more days per month.

Well that doesn't sound good, so what are we saying 20 to 25 days a month on the job?
No.

At Jazz we have a garunteed 12 days off, puts with the minimum day garuntee of 4.5 and blocking averages around 80 a month the only way the company will be able to meet both the regs and CBA is to increase the flying productivity. Less sits, less long holds etc.
---------- ADS -----------
  

bobcaygeon
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 518
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#19 Post by bobcaygeon » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:51 pm

Lightchop wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:49 pm
marakii wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:06 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 6:54 pm
Our company told us the same- working more days to make up the difference, you know, since it's somehow our problem.
So basically, they won't hire more just make the present pilots fly more days per month.

Well that doesn't sound good, so what are we saying 20 to 25 days a month on the job?
No.

At Jazz we have a garunteed 12 days off, puts with the minimum day garuntee of 4.5 and blocking averages around 80 a month the only way the company will be able to meet both the regs and CBA is to increase the flying productivity. Less sits, less long holds etc.
No but the good high credit days will disappear and everyone will work 18 days like a reserve dog vs 12 days for those with decent seniority and overnighting in Timmins, Wabush, and Grand Prairie.

The rules need to be changed but I don't want to work extra days because my checkin was at 0700 vs 0730. Look at the regs, It's there. Yesterday doesn't count as a day off if I start before 0730 today like it does now when I need 36 hrs off in 7 days. It's that crap that will put me in hotels more often or keep me working 3 on 1 off, 1 on 2 off, etc
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by bobcaygeon on Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Lightchop
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 220
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 10:03 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#20 Post by Lightchop » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:54 pm

bobcaygeon wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:51 pm
Lightchop wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:49 pm
marakii wrote:
Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:06 pm


So basically, they won't hire more just make the present pilots fly more days per month.

Well that doesn't sound good, so what are we saying 20 to 25 days a month on the job?
No.

At Jazz we have a garunteed 12 days off, puts with the minimum day garuntee of 4.5 and blocking averages around 80 a month the only way the company will be able to meet both the regs and CBA is to increase the flying productivity. Less sits, less long holds etc.
No but the good high credit days will disappear and everyone will work 18 days like a reserve dog vs 12 days for those with decent seniority and overnighting in Timmins, Wabush, and Grand Prairie
Ooorrr, we'll see less of the really Sr guys working the 12 day months (*cough YVR CRJ) and Jr guys working 17-18, and everyone falling more into the 14-16 days worked. That's a win in my books.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#21 Post by DanWEC » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:23 pm

seven-oh-nooo wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:58 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:50 am
Also, IMO The temper tantrum that ATAC is throwing about the duty regs is very short sighted.
From the meetings I've sat in I would say panic is a better term than temper tantrum. It's surreal to watch multiple adults fight back tears over the implications to their livelihood if a flight crew shortage is made worse. I've been able to hang on but it isn't fun and it's not what I signed up for.
goingnowherefast wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:28 am
The way I see it is operators brought the new rules on themselves.
Every operator has the option to implement shorter duty days or better schedules and every pilot has the opportunity to shun those who don't. Every good operator also has a scumbag operator next door who pays less, works their staff harder, and cuts whatever corners they can get away with yet somehow they still have a line of applicants out the door and half way around the block who don't give a shit about any of that.

Anyways, the change to the regs was rejected at whatever gazette stage it got to and before it can be reconsidered it will have to be substantially changed. It would be awfully nice if pilot reps, ATAC and transport could all get together without a fight and sort something out for the next attempt but I won't be holding my breath.
My heart genuinely goes out to the guys who have had a rough go because of the shortage so far, (Likely mostly in the 703 regime) but I would suggest that safety ultimately trumps everything. We can't continue to trail the entire world in this aspect.
On the 703 topic, it does seem like the more reputable operators are faring better.
---------- ADS -----------
  

goingnowherefast
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#22 Post by goingnowherefast » Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:48 pm

seven-oh-nooo wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 12:58 pm
DanWEC wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:50 am
Also, IMO The temper tantrum that ATAC is throwing about the duty regs is very short sighted.
From the meetings I've sat in I would say panic is a better term than temper tantrum. It's surreal to watch multiple adults fight back tears over the implications to their livelihood if a flight crew shortage is made worse. I've been able to hang on but it isn't fun and it's not what I signed up for.
goingnowherefast wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 7:28 am
The way I see it is operators brought the new rules on themselves.
Every operator has the option to implement shorter duty days or better schedules and every pilot has the opportunity to shun those who don't. Every good operator also has a scumbag operator next door who pays less, works their staff harder, and cuts whatever corners they can get away with yet somehow they still have a line of applicants out the door and half way around the block who don't give a shit about any of that.

Anyways, the change to the regs was rejected at whatever gazette stage it got to and before it can be reconsidered it will have to be substantially changed. It would be awfully nice if pilot reps, ATAC and transport could all get together without a fight and sort something out for the next attempt but I won't be holding my breath.
I have a hard time feeling sympathy for the ATAC crowd. The ones being brought to tears because they're looking at no longer able to exploit pilots for 14 hours a day, 10 off and repeat.

Make piloting a desirable profession and you'll have more people willing to undergo the the training to become a professional pilot. As it stands currently, many potential professional pilots would rather do a normal 9-5 job and fly recreationally. The thought of investing 80 grand in training to work in shithole-ville NWT for 30 grand a year, 23 days a month, 12 hour days and no vacation just is a huge turn off.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#23 Post by DanWEC » Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:17 pm

If I have any criticism of the proposed regs is that there I wasn't enough emphasis on the differences between 703-705. Also nowhere near enough weight placed on cycles in 705.
Working 9 days a month with 2 cycles, on a long 13 hour turn into PUJ and back is one hell of a lot less fatiguing then battling your way into ORD and LGA and back for the same amount of time, 19 days a month. Not to mention the cumulative effect with more days.
It would be great to do a fatigue analysis on each of those pilots groups at the end of the day, and base regulations accordingly, but that would make way too much sense.

As much as I feel for smaller operators, as goingnowherefast above says, I also have very little sympathy for 705 operators. Every time negotiations come around, it's perpetually the pilots making concessions for the company, very minimally the other way around.
---------- ADS -----------
  

digits_
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1520
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#24 Post by digits_ » Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:11 pm

DanWEC wrote:
Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:17 pm
If I have any criticism of the proposed regs is that there I wasn't enough emphasis on the differences between 703-705. Also nowhere near enough weight placed on cycles in 705.
Working 9 days a month with 2 cycles, on a long 13 hour turn into PUJ and back is one hell of a lot less fatiguing then battling your way into ORD and LGA and back for the same amount of time, 19 days a month. Not to mention the cumulative effect with more days.
It would be great to do a fatigue analysis on each of those pilots groups at the end of the day, and base regulations accordingly, but that would make way too much sense.

As much as I feel for smaller operators, as goingnowherefast above says, I also have very little sympathy for 705 operators. Every time negotiations come around, it's perpetually the pilots making concessions for the company, very minimally the other way around.
Really? Flying 13 hours with autopilot in 705 is more fatiguing than 15 hour days without autopilot up north in miserable conditions with close to zero ground support? Or any medevac operator vs any airline?

A tired pilot is a tired pilot. There should be no difference under what rules you are flying. There are crappy 703 jobs and there are crappy 705 jobs, just like there are good 703 and good 705 jobs. Don't allow smaller operators without any union support to abuse the regulations further.
---------- ADS -----------
  

DanWEC
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: The other side of new duty regs?

#25 Post by DanWEC » Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:25 pm

I get what you're saying digits, and I guess I should have emphasized the individually unique environments of many operators. Taking a quick 10 minute hop in the beaver at the end of the day has a lot less BS attached to it compared to a 30 minute yyz-yow trip in some sort of regional dart.

That being said, I've been very fortunate to have only worked for some pretty great "smallish" operators that only took advantage of me outside of the airplane. ;)

Now that I'm in a 705, I'm feel more worn down than I ever have been in any aviation job before. Weird. Oh, I'm old.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “General Airline Industry Comments”