Reps from operators express concern on new duty regs

[jd832]

Representatives from the Air Transport Association of Canada hold a press conference on propose duty regulations.

http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/headline ... s/61703566

[tbaylx]

Funny how almost every other country manages to implement modern fatigue duty rules that take into account circadian rhythm and number of sectors but when when Canada tries to do it it takes years and ATAC threatens route cuts and doom and gloom if such a thing goes ahead as planned.
Yup your going to have to hire more pilots, and yes that is going to drop the experience levels in the flight deck. And yes, that is safer than having us do 6 sectors in the middle of the night, or switching from day to nights, or doing a 17 hour duty day. Time to accept the change and stop fear mongering. Start adapting your training programs to accommodate lower time pilots.

[Marinth]

Wow, these guys are so full of shit I expect it to start coming out their ear's by the end of the conference.

[digits_]

The guy talking in the beginning of the video sounds like he's been up for over 14 hours as well. He should get some sleep.

[eyebrow737]

Ironically, 3 of those guys are pilots, don't know about Canadian North.

They do have some very valid points though. It is Transport Canada's process and methodologies they have issue with.

It is imperative pilots also have their say instead of just the ones holding the purse strings.

[Boreas]

Proposed Regulations

Heaven forbid we meet ICAO obligations

[PT6onH20]

I am very disappointed to have one of my former DFO's opposing the proposed regulation changes. He would always remind the line pilots that he was there with us, "flying the line" and that he understood the challenges we faced. Shame on these management "pilots" for selling out on safety, to pad their bonuses.

EDIT - After watching the whole video....of course he's still boasting about flying the line. LOL

[monkey]

The board represents the best of the best in Canadian aviation.

[infiniteregulus]

The board represents the best of the best in Canadian aviation.

hahahaha right?!

[dialdriver]

The proposed regulations allow you to use FRMS instead of the prescribed rules. If have the data to back it up, you can design your own rules.

I don't understand their problem. Why don't these ATAC boys just get their data together and implement FRMS?

[atphat]

The "college" of pilots just appointed a fatigue denier to their board recently. Losing any credibility they had.

[Diadem]

They keep saying that the proposed regulations are outdated, and that there are better options that are based on science, so what are they? They haven't proposed any alternatives, and seem to want to keep things the same as they are now, so are they implying that the current regs are more modern and scientific than the proposed ones? They don't want Transport to paint with a broad brush, but a straight 14-hour duty day isn't overly broad, outdated, and lacking scientific basis? Steve Hankirk also said there has never been a plane crash in Canada which was attributed to fatigue, which is a lie: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/pilot-fat ... s-1.910002 There are so many other problems with the whole press conference that I could do a point-by-point breakdown, but it would stretch for pages and I'd probably have a stroke.
If they think there's a better way, they need to come out and say it, or shut up. They obviously just intend to obfuscate and delay until the whole issue goes away, leaving them with the current regs.

[tbaylx]

Keep in mind Steve is running Canadian North, the same airline that was doing 6 sectors across Canada in the middle of the night in 737-200's. Going into St John's at 9am most of the guys were so tired the amount of little errors were almost comical. Last i checked in aviation our goal isn't to wait for an accident before we fix what's broken.

[Salt]

It is my suspicion that many of the current managers in Canadian aviation are trapped in an outdated paradigm. They simply can not see hazards associated with fatigue. I believe this would be similar to previous generations that accepted driving while intoxicated as being a norm, not wearing seat belts, the hazards of smoking..etc. Often people who are stuck in such mindsets require a localized tragedy to snap them out of it. Or simply be policed from continuing in a hazardous attitude. We cannot hope that the current management in many of our companies in Canada will come around to the idea of fatigue management on their own. They will likely have to be pulled kicking and screaming out of the dark. Hopefully Transport can stick to their guns.

Or maybe we can all wring our hands in a of couple years down the road when a bagged crew piles one in. I believe this issue will become more apparent as we accrue less experienced crews flying more complex machinery. Previous generations of pilots have had on average higher levels of experience to help back them up despite fatigue. The new generation getting started on light turboprops and regional aircraft will have to be more dependent on automation and SOPs to keep them safe.

[momnosam7]

Keep in mind Steve is running Canadian North, the same airline that was doing 6 sectors across Canada in the middle of the night in 737-200's. Going into St John's at 9am most of the guys were so tired the amount of little errors were almost comical. Last i checked in aviation our goal isn't to wait for an accident before we fix what's broken.

Isn't the message from them that they want more consultation which is about the same message from ALPA about the issues? I doubt many pilots, including apparently some posters on here, have actually read the proposal, the IATA recommendations and FAR's. ALPA has and these operators have and they all say we are not satisfied. Why do you blindly believe TC in some anecdotal statements about alignment? There are only something like 8 IATA audited airlines in Canada and two of them are on stage saying "pause, we need new regs but lets all talk about this". They are also speaking for all of ATAC which of course includes Jazz and Chorus Aviation.

[goingnowherefast]

Both ALPA and operators dislike the proposed regs, but for opposite reasons. ALPA says they're watered down and wants them to be more aligned with the rest of the world, and maybe world leading. Operators are saying they're too expensive and unnecessary.

[momnosam7]

Both ALPA and operators dislike the proposed regs, but for opposite reasons. ALPA says they're watered down and wants them to be more aligned with the rest of the world, and maybe world leading. Operators are saying they're too expensive and unnecessary.

None of them said they were unnecessary and they said the cost of the regulations "as proposed" were too expensive because they are too complicated, convoluted and contradictory. In fact they went out of their way to say the current regs need to change and that the change should be based on the science of today (meaning, not what the US used a decade ago). The case Sunwing brought up about Australia is bang on - as an industry, we all need to get this right. I think pilots should do their own homework and not jump to side with TC, the unions or the industry. It is a pilot in the ac, not the regulator not the union and not the ceo.

[Diadem]

The proposed regulations aren't perfect, but they're better than the existing regime. These operators are implying the opposite, and the fact that they haven't proposed an alternative indicates that they don't want change. If there's a better system, then they need to propose it, because no one can evaluate their suggestion against the proposed regs if no one knows what the alternative is. What they want is for the proposal to be scrapped and the process started over, which would take years, meaning that they could keep pushing their crews on 14-hour days in the meantime; no doubt, whatever the next proposal is, they would take the same approach and say that it's not the right way of doing things. They'll never actually put forward an alternative, because as long as they don't they can say that there's a better way, and continue delaying the process. I won't take them seriously until they produce something constructive.

[momnosam7]

The proposed regulations aren't perfect, but they're better than the existing regime. These operators are implying the opposite, and the fact that they haven't proposed an alternative indicates that they don't want change. If there's a better system, then they need to propose it, because no one can evaluate their suggestion against the proposed regs if no one knows what the alternative is. What they want is for the proposal to be scrapped and the process started over, which would take years, meaning that they could keep pushing their crews on 14-hour days in the meantime; no doubt, whatever the next proposal is, they would take the same approach and say that it's not the right way of doing things. They'll never actually put forward an alternative, because as long as they don't they can say that there's a better way, and continue delaying the process. I won't take them seriously until they produce something constructive.

unfortunately, that is not the way the process works, never has never will. What they are saying (I have no idea if true BTW) is that the consultation process was flawed from the start because of A,B,C,.... ALPA is saying the same thing. I agree different ends of the argument but both say the gov didn't have any meaningful consultation as is required by law.

My only personal opinion on who is "more right" is that I think it is a big mistake to assume TC are the defacto good guys here, hey - maybe it ALPA, maybe its industry but they are both yelling STOP. I expect very few if any pilots have really read the Gazette 1 info and compared it to IATA or the FAR's in any fulsome way. How many pilots for example know about what happened in Australia??

[Boreas]

Working for up to 14 hours straight starting at midnight is criminal. Period.

That needs to stop. It should have stopped years ago!

Further investigate and consult with industry, by all means. The current regulations - which I would argue are the worst in the world in terms of fatigue - need to change in the meantime. If something even better can be worked out and implemented several years from now, I'll be the first to support it.

[momnosam7]

Working for up to 14 hours straight starting at midnight is criminal. Period.

That needs to stop. It should have stopped years ago!

Further investigate and consult with industry, by all means. The current regulations - which I would argue are the worst in the world in terms of fatigue - need to change in the meantime. If something even better can be worked out and implemented several years from now, I'll be the first to support it.

Guess that is the point.... are these proposed regs actually better? They may solve the 14 hr problem but that alone comes with a lot of baggage for the pilot especially commuters!!

[Boreas]

Guess that is the point.... are these proposed regs actually better? They may solve the 14 hr problem but that alone comes with a lot of baggage for the pilot especially commuters!!

Yes, yes they are.

• Shorter duty periods

• Duty periods adjusted for circadian phase

• The introduction of duty limit periods (weekly, monthly, yearly)

• Reduced maximum flight time

• Increased rest periods

etc.

Honestly, name another "first-world" country where you can fly for 1200 h/year.

[Diadem]

If these operators were only saying that the proposed regs could be improved upon, I might believe them; however, they're also arguing that reducing the duty hours or adding restrictions based on what time of day pilots work will increase costs to the point that customers in remote areas won't be able to afford service, and so many pilots will have to be hired that requirements will drop to dangerous levels. They're framing the whole issue as a concern about safety, which is why I don't buy that they think there's a better way: any method that reduces duty time will require an increase in pilots, and they don't want that. I want to see their alternate proposal because I want to see the means by which they intend to improve safety without affecting service, price, or staffing levels. Their entire goal is to keep 14-hour days, with six-day weeks, employing as little staff as they possibly can, and to hell with the consequences.

[FL007]

Embarrassing.. Canadian north competes against non Canadian companies who will undercut them in charter costs to operate in Canada who don't have to abide by the new Canadian regulations? Ummm.....?

I really wish there was someone there to just clarify the statements from these companies... And their broad statements.

I didn't ever hear a quantifiable number other than the 26% additional pilots needing to be hired, which in some cases may be 2 more pilots.

The cost that must be passed on to the customer? How much would a 26% increase of pilots cost to a consumer? If a pilot costs 10% of the total cost per flight (very liberal number) then a 26% increase of pilot salaries would be a 2.6% increase per flight, which divided by pax etc wouldn't be much at all.

I understand the cargojet point of view on having a hard time operating at night, but every other company I have no pity for.

These are companies that force 6-10 sectors on 12-14hr days on 705 machines. That's insane. As well not having to abide by labor laws in regards to paid breaks/lunch breaks/max work days (and unpaid) deadheading/overtime/vacation. Third worldly at the best, embarrassing really.

[Inverted2]

How many times did those greedy airline operators say “indiginous” in that video? They are trying to spin it that the natives will starve and suffer when really it’s their bottom line that will suffer after taking advantage of Canadian pilots for too long.