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.
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.
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.
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 -----------
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
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.
Number of cycles is a big issue. I remember a 10 hour day of 12 cycles in the North was a lot more fatiguing than what I do right now at 12-14 hour, 2 cycles.
In fact, talking to coworkers in my 705 op with a lot of day turns, you will find the desire for the new regs a lot more muted.
Regionals, though, you guys really need it. But in operations like Air Transat and Sunwing that is high-credit high-efficiency flying, the only time I see fatigue is repeated days in a row and alternating mornings and evening flights.
The morale boost of being home every night and the benefits of "sleeping in your own bed" definitely have a subjective positive effect on fatigue.
BigQ wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:56 am
Number of cycles is a big issue. I remember a 10 hour day of 12 cycles in the North was a lot more fatiguing than what I do right now at 12-14 hour, 2 cycles.
In fact, talking to coworkers in my 705 op with a lot of day turns, you will find the desire for the new regs a lot more muted.
Regionals, though, you guys really need it. But in operations like Air Transat and Sunwing that is high-credit high-efficiency flying, the only time I see fatigue is repeated days in a row and alternating mornings and evening flights.
The morale boost of being home every night and the benefits of "sleeping in your own bed" definitely have a subjective positive effect on fatigue.
I believe that's supposed to be the point of the FRMS and it's ability to over ride the fatigue regulations. It's not just a morale boost to sleep at home every night, it takes stress out of your life, which reduces fatigue, and you're going to get a better sleep in your own bed, which reduces also reduces fatigue. I hope that transat and sunwing will be able to make these arguments that working 10 - 13 hour, 2 leg days and being home at night, getting several days off to catch up on sleep is beneficial vs. having to fly south, spend 24 hours away from your family, sleeping in a hotel, eating food on the road, etc... Again, there is a good FRMS point to be made, and I believe TC will accept that.
BigQ wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 7:56 am
Number of cycles is a big issue. I remember a 10 hour day of 12 cycles in the North was a lot more fatiguing than what I do right now at 12-14 hour, 2 cycles.
In fact, talking to coworkers in my 705 op with a lot of day turns, you will find the desire for the new regs a lot more muted.
Regionals, though, you guys really need it. But in operations like Air Transat and Sunwing that is high-credit high-efficiency flying, the only time I see fatigue is repeated days in a row and alternating mornings and evening flights.
The morale boost of being home every night and the benefits of "sleeping in your own bed" definitely have a subjective positive effect on fatigue.
I believe that's supposed to be the point of the FRMS and it's ability to over ride the fatigue regulations. It's not just a morale boost to sleep at home every night, it takes stress out of your life, which reduces fatigue, and you're going to get a better sleep in your own bed, which reduces also reduces fatigue. I hope that transat and sunwing will be able to make these arguments that working 10 - 13 hour, 2 leg days and being home at night, getting several days off to catch up on sleep is beneficial vs. having to fly south, spend 24 hours away from your family, sleeping in a hotel, eating food on the road, etc... Again, there is a good FRMS point to be made, and I believe TC will accept that.
I agree 100%, and this is the intended purpose of the FRMS inclusion. I just hope the weight of the FRMS doesn't get abused and approved where it shouldn't be, such as in virtually any regional.
Hey guys, anyone here been to Air Transat interview in Montreal? would appreciate a feed back, also, just wondering how they do the SIM test, any other tests I should know about? Thanks guys, much appreciated.
One way would be to get rid of 17 hours "unforeseen" under all circumstances and replace it with "limits" as max duty time under various scenarios and "targets" for building schedules; with limits being a little longer for instance 2-3 hours. That way there is some room for flexibility if need be, but schedules cannot be extended to the "limit". The proposed revision already has little change for two sectors originating and returning to home base, allowing the longer turns to come back to base which is good for pilots and company.
