Passenger Rights

Discuss topics relating to airlines.

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

Post Reply
Message
Author
infiniteregulus
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:46 am

Passenger Rights

#1 Post by infiniteregulus » Tue May 16, 2017 10:35 am

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/new-pass ... -1.3415794

Wonder how this will affect operating costs?...
---------- ADS -----------

Rupert_Pupkin
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2017 4:21 pm

Re: Passenger Rights

#2 Post by Rupert_Pupkin » Tue May 16, 2017 11:39 am

infiniteregulus wrote:http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/new-pass ... -1.3415794

Wonder how this will affect operating costs?...
Hopefully the no bumping rule goes for Cons too :lol:
---------- ADS -----------

DrSpaceman
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am

Re: Passenger Rights

#3 Post by DrSpaceman » Tue May 16, 2017 2:03 pm

I cannot believe how reactionary this administration has been. First the 2 person in cockpit rule, then the alcool incident and ensuing inquiry and now this?

Seems like all TC is good for now is weak PR following the story of the week...
Really disappointed in Garneau, expected more from an ex-astronaut.
---------- ADS -----------

aV1aTOr
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 2:15 pm

Re: Passenger Rights

#4 Post by aV1aTOr » Tue May 16, 2017 4:09 pm

DrSpaceman wrote:I cannot believe how reactionary this administration has been. First the 2 person in cockpit rule, then the alcool incident and ensuing inquiry and now this?

Seems like all TC is good for now is weak PR following the story of the week...
Really disappointed in Garneau, expected more from an ex-astronaut.
Completely agree.
---------- ADS -----------

TheStig
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: Passenger Rights

#5 Post by TheStig » Tue May 16, 2017 4:49 pm

DrSpaceman wrote:I cannot believe how reactionary this administration has been. First the 2 person in cockpit rule, then the alcool incident and ensuing inquiry and now this?

Seems like all TC is good for now is weak PR following the story of the week...
Really disappointed in Garneau, expected more from an ex-astronaut.
Lisa Raitt (Conservative) was at the helm for the 2 in the flight deck rule, which they had no trouble implementing over the course of a weekend. Flight Duty times on the other hand...speaking of which, for those here interested in improving aviation safety I've encourage you to visit this website, and sign the petition:

https://saferskies.ca/home
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
JohnnyHotRocks
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 643
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:18 am

Re: Passenger Rights

#6 Post by JohnnyHotRocks » Tue May 16, 2017 7:58 pm

---------- ADS -----------

infiniteregulus
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:46 am

Re: Passenger Rights

#7 Post by infiniteregulus » Wed May 17, 2017 12:08 am

Haha ATAC, "safety is our primary concern" yet we're writing a letter to not increase safety with fatigue policy. ATAC is a joke...it's all about money.
---------- ADS -----------

NotDirty!
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 181
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:04 pm

Re: Passenger Rights

#8 Post by NotDirty! » Wed May 17, 2017 8:14 am

infiniteregulus wrote:Haha ATAC, "safety is our primary concern" yet we're writing a letter to not increase safety with fatigue policy. ATAC is a joke...it's all about money.
Did you actually read their letter??? I thought it was actually quite well balanced (considering the source), and provided a legitimate argument that one size does not fit all when it comes to the aviation industry.
---------- ADS -----------

North Shore
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 5172
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 3:47 pm
Location: Straight outta Dundarave...

Re: Passenger Rights

#9 Post by North Shore » Wed May 17, 2017 8:29 am

These rules are designed to manage fatigue on flights that can last 12 hours or more, but Transport Canada wants to impose the exact same rules on the fly-in fishing camp pilot.
Riiight, a 14 hour duty day on a busy 6 camp-change Saturday with unloading and loading at both ends is somehow less fatiguing than a 12 hour leg across the Pacific....
---------- ADS -----------
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?

Ass, Licence, Job. In that order.

infiniteregulus
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:46 am

Re: Passenger Rights

#10 Post by infiniteregulus » Wed May 17, 2017 9:39 am

I don't see how one long-haul flight can be any more fatiguing than operating 10 legs in a day which is usually A LOT more work intensive, especially the smaller carriers with less automated machines and lenient CARS regs. I agree it shouldn't be a blanket policy, however, fatigue is fatigue is fatigue. Their "argument", when you read between the lines, is that it will cost them more as their crews will be less available to work per the new regs, regardless of safety, so they're obviously gonna defend it to the death. I just find their side hypocritical to be honest. Any sane person can conclude that the SAFER option is better rest requirements..rest requirements that THE ENTIRE REST OF THE PLANET follows hahaha. :roll:
---------- ADS -----------

lownslow
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:56 am

Re: Passenger Rights

#11 Post by lownslow » Wed May 17, 2017 4:21 pm

Can I waive my passenger rights and save like three bucks on my ticket?
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
Redneck_pilot86
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1179
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 12:47 pm
Location: between 60 and 70

Re: Passenger Rights

#12 Post by Redneck_pilot86 » Sun Jun 25, 2017 5:34 pm

infiniteregulus wrote:I don't see how one long-haul flight can be any more fatiguing than operating 10 legs in a day which is usually A LOT more work intensive, especially the smaller carriers with less automated machines and lenient CARS regs. I agree it shouldn't be a blanket policy, however, fatigue is fatigue is fatigue. Their "argument", when you read between the lines, is that it will cost them more as their crews will be less available to work per the new regs, regardless of safety, so they're obviously gonna defend it to the death. I just find their side hypocritical to be honest. Any sane person can conclude that the SAFER option is better rest requirements..rest requirements that THE ENTIRE REST OF THE PLANET follows hahaha. :roll:
Can you see how 2 short flights, with 12 hours of sitting on the couch watching TV inbetween could be significantly less fatiguing?
---------- ADS -----------
The only three things a wingman should ever say: 1. "Two's up" 2. "You're on fire" 3. "I'll take the fat one"

User avatar
sepia
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 4:51 pm
Location: creating a warmer print tone

Re: Passenger Rights

#13 Post by sepia » Tue Jun 27, 2017 11:08 am

Redneck_pilot86 wrote:
infiniteregulus wrote:I don't see how one long-haul flight can be any more fatiguing than operating 10 legs in a day which is usually A LOT more work intensive, especially the smaller carriers with less automated machines and lenient CARS regs. I agree it shouldn't be a blanket policy, however, fatigue is fatigue is fatigue. Their "argument", when you read between the lines, is that it will cost them more as their crews will be less available to work per the new regs, regardless of safety, so they're obviously gonna defend it to the death. I just find their side hypocritical to be honest. Any sane person can conclude that the SAFER option is better rest requirements..rest requirements that THE ENTIRE REST OF THE PLANET follows hahaha. :roll:
Can you see how 2 short flights, with 12 hours of sitting on the couch watching TV inbetween could be significantly less fatiguing?
Can you see how going back to your choice of recliners or beds in the temperature controlled bunk of a 777 and watching movies or sleeping for 1/2 of that 12hr flight, while having people bring you food and coffee is even less fatiguing?

I'm pretty sure anyone that's done both understands neither way escapes fatigue. Why on earth you'd argue to fatigue yourself is beyond me.
---------- ADS -----------
... on the midnight train to romford

infiniteregulus
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:46 am

Re: Passenger Rights

#14 Post by infiniteregulus » Tue Jun 27, 2017 11:39 am

Work is work and that is fatiguing. You can lay in bed all day after waking up and doing nothing but stare at the ceiling, but eventually there's going to be a point in your supreme laziness where you can no longer remain awake (I can't say I've ever been THAT lazy). It's basic physiology. Humans eventually need rest, regardless of their activities. When you throw in more activities (work), more/sooner rest is required. So whether you're sitting in a cockpit chair or a 777 bunk, you're not fully rested. I can imagine that no captain is fully at ease when "resting" in the bunks with the responsibility on their shoulders. Or Medevac guys getting called at 11pm to work a shift, min rest, then back at it 1pm, etc.. They're clocks get COMPLETELY messed up with no regulatory provisions for time of day. I've been there and it completely destroys you. EVERY pilot needs rest protection, and the current rules are far too basic and archaic from instructor to pipeline to medevac to military to regional to mainline to astronaut pilots. I'm afraid ATAC has NO say in this whatsoever. Money and economics should never fully trump safety.
When are these new regs coming out anyway?
---------- ADS -----------

Post Reply

Return to “General Airline Industry Comments”