Delta Pilots Association
02-06-2014, 08:37 AM
#9081
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
02-06-2014, 08:51 AM
#9082
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
I read your post. To recap, here's the exchange:
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
Okay (and this question is for Johnso too)...
If a flight crew member determines for himself that exactly 8 hours behind the door is sufficient, is he legal?
Or let me ask a similar question... If I decide that 300 knots below 10,000' over the U.S. Is sufficient, have I violated any FAR?
The answer to your question is that it's your decision. Crewmembers must be provided 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep opportunity. You can't put a specific definition on that. Some guys can fall asleep in a hard chair in 30 seconds. Others need perfect conditions. Temp at 65 degrees, dark conditions, etc. It's your decision to decide whether you're rested. It always has been. Did you ever hesitate to call in fatigued before the law backed you up?
In your response, you indicate that the answer to my question is that "it's your decision." So what you are effectively saying is that, in that scenario (exactly 8 hours behind the door) it would be okay as long as that is the decision that is made.
Now you're saying that you understand exactly what I'm saying. So which is it? Did you change your mind?
And if you're still confused, let me try one last time to clarify. I am saying unequivocally that exactly 8 hours behind the door is illegal for ANYONE. No human being has the opportunity to sleep for 8 hours if all the time he/she has is 8 hours behind the door. It's physically impossible and is therefore a clear violation of FAR 117. The only question is exactly how much MORE than 8 hours one needs... and THAT is where the individual judgment/decision comes into play. DALPA is trying to say that our contractual "8 hours behind the door" satisfies this FAR as long as the flightcrew member agrees that it provides the specified 8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity. It doesn't. It can't possibly. Do you see the problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAL 88 Driver
Okay (and this question is for Johnso too)...
If a flight crew member determines for himself that exactly 8 hours behind the door is sufficient, is he legal?
Or let me ask a similar question... If I decide that 300 knots below 10,000' over the U.S. Is sufficient, have I violated any FAR?
The answer to your question is that it's your decision. Crewmembers must be provided 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep opportunity. You can't put a specific definition on that. Some guys can fall asleep in a hard chair in 30 seconds. Others need perfect conditions. Temp at 65 degrees, dark conditions, etc. It's your decision to decide whether you're rested. It always has been. Did you ever hesitate to call in fatigued before the law backed you up?
In your response, you indicate that the answer to my question is that "it's your decision." So what you are effectively saying is that, in that scenario (exactly 8 hours behind the door) it would be okay as long as that is the decision that is made.
Now you're saying that you understand exactly what I'm saying. So which is it? Did you change your mind?
And if you're still confused, let me try one last time to clarify. I am saying unequivocally that exactly 8 hours behind the door is illegal for ANYONE. No human being has the opportunity to sleep for 8 hours if all the time he/she has is 8 hours behind the door. It's physically impossible and is therefore a clear violation of FAR 117. The only question is exactly how much MORE than 8 hours one needs... and THAT is where the individual judgment/decision comes into play. DALPA is trying to say that our contractual "8 hours behind the door" satisfies this FAR as long as the flightcrew member agrees that it provides the specified 8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity. It doesn't. It can't possibly. Do you see the problem?
I'll make this simple. Be a big boy. Make your own decisions. If you're not confident with that, then I can't help you.
02-06-2014, 08:53 AM
#9083
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
See my above response to Johnso. If you still don't get it then I just can't help you.
My only agenda here is to make sure my representatives are on the same page before it becomes an issue at some point. Right now, they are clearly not. Depending on who you talk to in DALPA, 8 hours behind the door is either okay or it's not. They need to get their story straight because they've got pilots who rely on their interpretations. And how long do you think it will be before the company seizes the opportunity being provided by DALPA and adopts this interpretation, which works to the company's benefit in minimizing flight delays?
You may think I have an agenda to sling mud at DALPA. While I fully admit that I don't mind seeing them wallowing in the mud they've created, all I'm doing here is shining a light on it. I think it's important that we get our story straight on this before someone ends up with a violation. Don't you?
It has nothing to do with me being worried about having to defend this. The FAR is crystal clear and I intend to comply with it, whether DALPA or the company tries to talk me out of it or not. It sure would be nice though if I knew the people supposed to be representing me were on the same page.
My only agenda here is to make sure my representatives are on the same page before it becomes an issue at some point. Right now, they are clearly not. Depending on who you talk to in DALPA, 8 hours behind the door is either okay or it's not. They need to get their story straight because they've got pilots who rely on their interpretations. And how long do you think it will be before the company seizes the opportunity being provided by DALPA and adopts this interpretation, which works to the company's benefit in minimizing flight delays?
You may think I have an agenda to sling mud at DALPA. While I fully admit that I don't mind seeing them wallowing in the mud they've created, all I'm doing here is shining a light on it. I think it's important that we get our story straight on this before someone ends up with a violation. Don't you?
It has nothing to do with me being worried about having to defend this. The FAR is crystal clear and I intend to comply with it, whether DALPA or the company tries to talk me out of it or not. It sure would be nice though if I knew the people supposed to be representing me were on the same page.
Once again, YOUR Reps are on the same page as you. Your ATL reps. The people who represent you.
02-06-2014, 09:02 AM
#9084
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
02-06-2014, 09:13 AM
#9086
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Are they? After a lengthy email exchange with all of them, only one would commit to a direct answer. The other three were too busy playing politics/CYA to give a direct answer.
02-06-2014, 09:44 AM
#9087
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: 777 Sim Instructor
Posts: 745
Excuse me for my ignorance but isn't our minimum layover 9:15 ? In most instances this would provide you with about 8:45 behind the door. If for some reason, traffic, delays or whatever you don't get an adequate time behind the door you call and adjust your departure time. This is a gray area that I'm sure is being debated but it has always been incumbent upon us pilots to get adequate rest.
02-06-2014, 09:48 AM
#9088
No longer cares
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: 767er Captain
Posts: 12,109
But you have. You keep making a really big deal out of the calculus of what is required for you to get into your room-, take a shower, go to bed, and fall asleep. Make a decision captain. It really isn't as hard as you are making it.
I'm guessing you really want SOPA/SMAC... amirite?
02-06-2014, 09:53 AM
#9089
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
But you have. You keep making a really big deal out of the calculus of what is required for you to get into your room-, take a shower, go to bed, and fall asleep. Make a decision captain. It really isn't as hard as you are making it.
I'm guessing you really want SOPA/SMAC... amirite?
I'm guessing you really want SOPA/SMAC... amirite?
Again, if you're really interested in an honest discussion, I suggest you go back and reread my previous posts on this topic. You are clearly either missing or ignoring the basics of what I'm saying. I'm not going to waste my time with you (because I suspect you're intentionally doing this to be obstinate)... I've already clearly stated the issue and my concern with it. You keep restating something entirely different. Let me know when/if you're ready to discuss this honestly.
02-06-2014, 10:02 AM
#9090
At home on the maddog!
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Position: ATL MD-88A
Posts: 2,874
Excuse me for my ignorance but isn't our minimum layover 9:15 ? In most instances this would provide you with about 8:45 behind the door. If for some reason, traffic, delays or whatever you don't get an adequate time behind the door you call and adjust your departure time. This is a gray area that I'm sure is being debated but it has always been incumbent upon us pilots to get adequate rest.
It's not a gray area at all. The minimum layover by FAR 117 is now 10:00, with an 8 hour uninterrupted sleep opportunity. The rest is not reduceable like it used to be. You are absolutely correct that in most instances this should provide more than enough time for the opportunity to sleep for 8 uninterrupted hours, as specified in the FAR. The problem is that some within DALPA (including the Chairman of the Scheduling Committee and at least one rep) are telling pilots that the 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep opportunity specified in the FAR is exactly the same thing as the "8 hours behind the door" in our pilot contract. That is absolutely, 100% false.
The only "gray area" is how much time over and above 8 hours behind the door a person needs in order to have the opportunity to get 8 hours of sleep per the FAR. That's going to have to be an individual judgment call made by each of us if we find ourselves in that situation. But no one can possibly have the opportunity to get 8 hours of sleep if they only have 8 hours (and no more) behind the door. It's physically impossible and is therefore a clear violation of FAR 117.
I think it's a problem when DALPA officials put out bad or misleading information, especially when it concerns compliance with an FAR. Don't you?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lbell911
Regional
23
04-22-2012 11:33 AM
