Safety FCIF
10-28-2010, 02:19 PM
#1
Line Dawg
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: 777 Captain LCA
Posts: 150
Safety FCIF
Anyone read the latest safety fcif. "Please be careful, stop the operation, peak is coming, runway incursions, ramping up flying hours, been 1.5 years since NRT"..............but................I didnt read anything about FATIGUE.
Lets be careful guys. Support each other. Dont push it. Happy Holidays and Peak.
Lets be careful guys. Support each other. Dont push it. Happy Holidays and Peak.
10-28-2010, 02:44 PM
#3
Administrator
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: C-172
Posts: 8,024
Peak or Happy Holidays? 
Seriously, I hope that if any one of you is fatigued, you will call in fatigued. You have to assume that the company is going to want to squeeze the most out of you, so it behooves you to resist those attempts. You have to take care of yourself, and of each other. If you don't, who will?
Seriously, I hope that if any one of you is fatigued, you will call in fatigued. You have to assume that the company is going to want to squeeze the most out of you, so it behooves you to resist those attempts. You have to take care of yourself, and of each other. If you don't, who will?
10-28-2010, 03:08 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
That's why the NPRM is finally here. Everyone knows the airline industry cannot be trusted to give us safe schedules. When push comes to shove they cry "It costs too much $$". Congress, thru the FAA, hasn't been holding them accountable and have been ignoring (manipulating?) NTSB efforts for years. Somehow we've broken thru that barrier. With the help of business friendly laws airlines pull every legal trick they can to minimize liability and are practiced at shifting blame.
Crewmembers bear too much responsibility for stopping the operation for fatigue issues. Sure they know more than scheduling when they are too tired but they also have to worry about being pulled off of trips without pay and, ultimately, keeping their jobs and maintaining a clean employment record. Anyone knowledgeable and honest will tell you that's not where the responsibility for maintaining a safe operation should rest. Crewmembers will usually fly fatigued to avoid risking their careers. But making them bear the most liability is the cheapest way. Less corporate liability means lower costs/prices. The public likes that. It also means more corporate money for political campaigns.
Federal intervention is necessary if safety is as important as consumers and politicians say it is. Safety has taken a back seat to corporate profit and political gain and I want that to change. I hope the NPRM doesn't falter due to these strong forces and the tendency of the electorate to be easily manipulated.
Crewmembers bear too much responsibility for stopping the operation for fatigue issues. Sure they know more than scheduling when they are too tired but they also have to worry about being pulled off of trips without pay and, ultimately, keeping their jobs and maintaining a clean employment record. Anyone knowledgeable and honest will tell you that's not where the responsibility for maintaining a safe operation should rest. Crewmembers will usually fly fatigued to avoid risking their careers. But making them bear the most liability is the cheapest way. Less corporate liability means lower costs/prices. The public likes that. It also means more corporate money for political campaigns.
Federal intervention is necessary if safety is as important as consumers and politicians say it is. Safety has taken a back seat to corporate profit and political gain and I want that to change. I hope the NPRM doesn't falter due to these strong forces and the tendency of the electorate to be easily manipulated.
Last edited by Gunter; 10-28-2010 at 03:39 PM.
10-28-2010, 04:22 PM
#5
Line Dawg
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: 777 Captain LCA
Posts: 150
That's why the NPRM is finally here. Everyone knows the airline industry cannot be trusted to give us safe schedules. When push comes to shove they cry "It costs too much $$". Congress, thru the FAA, hasn't been holding them accountable and have been ignoring (manipulating?) NTSB efforts for years. Somehow we've broken thru that barrier. With the help of business friendly laws airlines pull every legal trick they can to minimize liability and are practiced at shifting blame.
Crewmembers bear too much responsibility for stopping the operation for fatigue issues. Sure they know more than scheduling when they are too tired but they also have to worry about being pulled off of trips without pay and, ultimately, keeping their jobs and maintaining a clean employment record. Anyone knowledgeable and honest will tell you that's not where the responsibility for maintaining a safe operation should rest. Crewmembers will usually fly fatigued to avoid risking their careers. But making them bear the most liability is the cheapest way. Less corporate liability means lower costs/prices. The public likes that. It also means more corporate money for political campaigns.
Federal intervention is necessary if safety is as important as consumers and politicians say it is. Safety has taken a back seat to corporate profit and political gain and I want that to change. I hope the NPRM doesn't falter due to these strong forces and the tendency of the electorate to be easily manipulated.
Crewmembers bear too much responsibility for stopping the operation for fatigue issues. Sure they know more than scheduling when they are too tired but they also have to worry about being pulled off of trips without pay and, ultimately, keeping their jobs and maintaining a clean employment record. Anyone knowledgeable and honest will tell you that's not where the responsibility for maintaining a safe operation should rest. Crewmembers will usually fly fatigued to avoid risking their careers. But making them bear the most liability is the cheapest way. Less corporate liability means lower costs/prices. The public likes that. It also means more corporate money for political campaigns.
Federal intervention is necessary if safety is as important as consumers and politicians say it is. Safety has taken a back seat to corporate profit and political gain and I want that to change. I hope the NPRM doesn't falter due to these strong forces and the tendency of the electorate to be easily manipulated.
Very well said Gunter.
10-28-2010, 05:05 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 777 Capt
Posts: 403
Anyone read the latest safety fcif. "Please be careful, stop the operation, peak is coming, runway incursions, ramping up flying hours, been 1.5 years since NRT"..............but................I didnt read anything about FATIGUE.
Lets be careful guys. Support each other. Dont push it. Happy Holidays and Peak.
Lets be careful guys. Support each other. Dont push it. Happy Holidays and Peak.
10-28-2010, 05:32 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: MD-11 Captain
Posts: 4,304
Would fatigue EVER be a causal factor in a company initiated investigation? (I know that ALPA was involved from the beginning of the incident?).
10-29-2010, 05:09 AM
#9
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B-777 Captain
Posts: 34
"Amen to that. Notice there was no mention of fatigue involved in the BUD incident, even though the SIG mentioned the dangers of the DEL-BUD-CDG pairing THREE TIMES in the SIG notes. It was BUD Ground's fault for the taxi instructions!"
Could you unpack that last statement a little more? Never been thru BUD. Thanks.
Could you unpack that last statement a little more? Never been thru BUD. Thanks.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
AUS_ATC
Hangar Talk
0
03-08-2006 06:56 PM
